1. Looking back on the history of Hamilton, what community or political leader do you most admire? What is it about him or her that has captured your admiration?
Victor Copps was seen as a man of the people. He was a leader with an aspiration and a vision for this city and understood that opportunity and prosperity should include all people and not just a few! If there is one thing that is clear from my time as Mayor is that we need to stand up for our city internally and externally, nothing good will come from running our city down and nothing but good will come from building it up.
2. What is the most useful piece of criticism you received as Mayor of Hamilton and how has that changed you?
Be strategic was what I was told. It is very easy to get distracted in this position and end up managing the day to day. That is why early on in my mandate, I launched my vision called NEXT Hamilton with five strategic areas of focus:
1. Responsible Government
2. Economic Development
3. Rapid Transit
4. Immigration
5. Environmental Sustainability
3. How would you characterize your brand of leadership? Do you think it's working? If you believe it is working, what are indicators that demonstrate that it is?
I think the proof of the effectiveness of my leadership is the results on the ground whether it be the measures concerning integrity, the boost in economic development, our progress on rapid transit, all of these measures started in an environment that had wide gaps in opinion and we were able to establish some consensus moving forward.
I have often described my brand of leadership as the 3cs Collaboration, Cooperation, and Consensus. I have always believed it is better to attempt to bring people into the development of an issue or solution, rather than isolate groups or people and ram something through.
4. You have a difficult role as Mayor. I imagine you receive a great deal of advice from many sources. Some have speculated that you can be stubborn at times and not be as receptive to advice. True? How do you process advice and how much does it influence your position on issues?
I greatly value all the advice I receive and I keep an open mind before making my final decision. I have my principles that ground me, my oath of office as Mayor, and the collectively developed vision and strategic plan to guide me. I believe in process and consultation and am adamant that good public policy can not be created on the fly.
As an example of how I balance priorities and make a difficult decision, I would refer you to the recent Winona Walmart decision: http://mayorfred.ca/posts/view/147
5. During your campaign, your radio ad stated in part “It’s time to give City Hall back to the people”. What did you mean by that and how has this theme developed in your administration?
What I meant - was essentially:
As a City we need to do a better job of engaging Hamiltonians.
That’s why we initiated a budget survey, created a Mayor for A Day program for youth, held open houses at all of the municipal service centers in the former municipalities, even polled people on issues before council and created a citizen’s economic development advisory committee.
I have been an advocate for new innovative methods and technology to enhance our public consultation process. As a City, we need to tap into the creativity of all our citizens
I wanted to restore public confidence in City Hall and refused any corporate or union donations. There is all too often the unfortunate impression that special interests have an inside track to city hall.
6. It was clear that there has been friction between yourself and some councillors, and between councillors. That dynamic continues to play out to some extent. What advice would you have to councillors in terms of promoting a greater degree of alignment, and to the extent that there continues to be some friction, what part of that do you own? What changes are you prepared to make?
I would differentiate between friction and healthy debate. In a functioning City Council, there is always going to be healthy debate especially when there are diverse views, representing different areas of the city.
I would say the vast majority of votes are in fact unanimous - they tend to be lower profile issues that the media tend not to report on. Even on the high profile issues, where there tends to be more debate, we still have examples of Council consensus - look at the votes on the Pan Am Games, Economic Development and the Integrity Commissioner. Also, at Council, I instituted a rotating chair system for the COW portion of the agenda which gives everyone a chance to chair a portion of City Council.
7. Hamilton offers many strategic and geographical advantages, as a city to invest in and to live in. How can we further boost our ability to leverage these features?
We are fortunate to have many advantages over other cities and we have been building on them.
• We are in the middle of the Green belt with rich agricultural production, a $1B agri-business and a “buy local” initiative to support local farmers and provide healthy food for citizens and create a sustainable city region.
• As a City we continue to transition to a post-industrial and more diversified economy.
• Creative entrepreneurs and young artists are attracted to our city for its affordable creative spaces and growing artistic community. This is generating investment to our city and will contribute to the revival of the downtown, waterfront and older industrial areas.
• We also have a significant and important port capacity, an airport whose major utility is the movement of goods around the country and the world. We sit at the crossroads of rail infrastructure and highway truck movements between major border crossings in Niagara and Windsor all of which is the basis of a multi-modal ship, truck, air and rail (STAR) infrastructure we can capitalize on.
• We have world class educational institutions, incredible top notch health care research and treatment facilities, a high quality of life and a growing cultural diversity all contributing to our vitality and vibrancy.
• To further boost these efforts we need to build our reputation as one of the most forward thinking communities. And we are doing that and others are taking notice:
• In its April ranking of North American cities of the future, FDI Magazine, from the Financial Times Group, ranked Hamilton third among large cities in terms of quality of life.
• The Economic Developers Council of Ontario recognized us last year as the most “investment ready” municipality in Ontario.
• Site Selection Magazine, has just ranked Hamilton among the Top Ten Canadian Metros when it comes to attracting new projects and expansions.
8. If you could take back one decision that you made or supported what would that be and why?
There may have been instances in which I wished our debate was more civilized, but I am confident with the decisions I have made as Mayor.
9. One distinct feature of your campaign was to not accept union or corporate donations. Why did you take this position and why was it important to you?
I took this position to give people the confidence that I am working in the best interests of the city and its people and not in the best interest of any special interest group.
10. Beyond the perceptions that some might have in terms of such contributions having the potential to influence councilors, do you dismiss the possibility that those perceptions can be founded on some degree of reality?
I have no doubt that the majority of special interest campaign contributions are intended to influence.
At the municipal level, the concentration of campaign contributions from a single set of interests is extraordinary and the imbalance is systemic. In the 2006 Municipal election nearly half of the money raised by Hamilton candidates came from corporations or trade unions. Of that 77% of the corporate donations and 62% of Union contributions, went to incumbents.
In addition, individuals who own a business or businesses or an individual who heads a union or is involved with one has multiple opportunities to contribute to election campaigns through both their business and personal contributions. Regular citizens do not have the same opportunity. It is about a level playing field for all Hamiltonians
I believe when one source of campaign funding dominates municipal campaigns - and is consistently shown to favour incumbents over other candidates, then there is a need to review the rules. With public confidence in elected officials and democratic institutions in decline, it is incumbent on us to explore every measure to enhance the integrity of the political process.
11. At the end of this term, what mark would you hope to have made as Mayor?
At the end of this term, I would like City Hall to more accountable, open and transparent. Issues like: the Integrity Commissioner, a Council Code of Conduct and campaign finance reform are all part of this.
In addition, I hope that when Hamiltonians look around, they feel a sense of momentum; that the community is moving in the more progressive direction they want. That they can visualize the NEXT Hamilton – an evolving economy, a vibrant arts sector, a rapid transit plan worthy of a 21st century city, a beautiful waterfront, and a greener more environmentally aware city.
Special thanks to Mayor Eisenberger for his service to Hamilton. Your comments on the Mayor's interview are welcome.
Here’s my take
ReplyDeleteQ1. Who cares? Lob question from Cal I guess.
2. sounds too contrived
3. yeah okaaaay…..
4.answer I ok. Example is bad- the waffling mayor- will do something he thinks is bad
5. weak answer. He could have killed this one
6. in denial big time. Guess he doesn’t think he’s part of the problem.
7. good answer but copied from a phamphlet. Another lob question
8. yeah okkkkaaayyyy
9. liked this one
10. liked this one to
11. not convincing
Nice guy- can’t lead.
Thanks to Mayor Eisenberger for his participation with this forum.
ReplyDeleteHis responses to the 'Tough Ten' or 11 ?, show a full grasp of the issues Hamilton is facing, and how intelligent and proactive responses to those matters are being developed and forwarded. I strongly support his position on union/private corporate donations. I would also say that there is nothing wrong with the Mayor's leadership - the lamentable performance and decorum on council is attributable to several of the councillors whose interest in working collaboratively in a mature, responsible manner is lacking. Finally, as I mentioned here recently, I believe that Mayor Eisenberger's excellent ability to communicate clearly and sincerely serves him and the city well, particularly as regards the media.
There are things that I do like about Mayor Fred: his stance on corporate and union donations, he seems to have a good understanding of environmental issues and his call for more participation from community members at large is a good thing as well.
ReplyDeleteAa far a changing things politically, we have a much better chance as citizens to affect policy at a local level, then the provincial or federal levels.
I believe that as citizens we must stand behind the good decisions and speak out against the bad ones.
I do not like the walmart plan, it just goes against everything I stand for. It does not make sense for many reasons, how can workers move forward, to move away from poverty when this corporation has contributed to the growing lvels of poverty across the globe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GINui9LdIQ
There is obviously two camps regarding Mayor Fred his critics and his friends. I give Mayor Fred kudos for his position on electoral campaign funds.
ReplyDeleteHaving read the previous post regarding WalMart's contribution to world poverty some what far fetched where could we find such evidence? My understanding is that WalMart pays minimum wages, are they the only business in Hamilton that does this? Are the prices much lower than other upscale stores that leaves coins in the pocket of shoppers? Please explain to me their corporate policy that dictates their mission statement in contributing to global poverty.
Yves Dubeau
Yves Dubeau: Did you watch the video?
ReplyDeleteIf you did not watch the video, then you should not make a comment until you do. The voices are from many, workers, other businesses and communities. Walmart, is more powerful then countries, so I think that we should pay attention.
Mayor. Let me help you answer question 11 with what you could not say.
ReplyDeleteCATCH Articles:
Most councillors rely on corporate donations
Jul 05, 2007
Most of the city councillors elected last fall relied heavily on corporations to fund their campaigns. But a new study indicates that corporate dominance in Hamilton is less than in most Toronto area suburbs.
Corporations provided 53% of all the donations over $100 reported by Hamilton’s mayor and councillors, even though six of the sixteen collected none at all. That’s because nine of the other ten got at least two-thirds of their campaign money from corporate donors.
Maria Pearson topped the list, collecting 82% of her funds from corporations. She was closely followed by Bernie Morelli (80%) and Sam Merulla (79%). Dave Mitchell, Terry Whitehead, Lloyd Ferguson, Tom Jackson and Chad Collins were clustered in the 73-75% range, while Brad Clark got 69% of his financial support from corporate donors.
Margaret McCarthy, Mayor Eisenberger, Russ Powers, Brian McHattie, Bob Bratina and Scott Duvall were at the other end of the scale with zero donations from corporations.
The first five also took nothing from unions, while Duvall got 45% of his funds from that source.
The remaining councillor, Robert Pasuta, got 40% of his funds from businesses, mainly incorporated farms in his rural ward, and the rest from individuals or his own pocket.
McCarthy took no donations of any kind, personally financing her entire campaign. Russ Powers paid for about three-fifths of his election costs, and got the rest from individuals. Bratina, Eisenberger and McHattie relied 100% on individual donors.
Overall, individual contributions accounted for 24% of campaign funds. That helped put Hamilton citizens in the middle of the pack compared to those in the Toronto area.
York university professor Robert MacDermid released a widely-reported study last week documenting the donations to the 131 winning candidates in Toronto and nine of its suburbs. He found dramatic differences, with citizens donating fully 75% of campaign funds to Toronto winners, but only 11.5% in Oshawa, and under 16% in both Brampton and Whitby. Mississauga, Ajax, Richmond Hill and Vaughn joined Hamilton in the 20-30% range while Markham candidates got almost half their donations from individuals.
Brampton councillors had the highest reliance on corporate largesse at 82%, with Richmond Hill and Pickering close behind at 79%. Hamilton’s 53% was fourth lowest, just behind Markham’s 52%, but still a long way from Ajax and Toronto at 29% and 19% respectively.
Hamilton easily ranked number one in union donations which accounted for nearly 9% of local contributions. The next closest in this category was Toronto at less than 3%. MacDermid’s study doesn’t indicate which unions were contributors, but in Hamilton the field was dominated by those in the construction field.
Duvall collected nearly $11,000 of the $25,000 donated by unions. Nearly all the rest went to Morelli, Whitehead, Collins, Jackson and Merulla. Winners who received no money from unions were Bratina, Clark, Eisenberger, Ferguson, McCarthy, McHattie, Mitchell, Pasuta and Powers.
MacDermid found only 17 Toronto area victors who took no corporate donations, including Toronto mayor David Miller. That amounts to less than 2% of the GTA winners – compared to more than a third of Hamilton’s elected officials. At the other extreme MacDermid reports that 19 councillors got more at least 90 percent of their donations from corporations.
Among reforms he is calling for is a ban on corporate donations – a rule already adopted at the national level and in provincial politics in Manitoba and Quebec.
“Allowing corporations to give is discriminatory as it allows people who hold wealth in corporate forms to give twice to a candidate,” argues MacDermid.
The province makes these rules, a potential issue in this fall’s provincial election.
This is a problem when people find You Tube as a sole source of information and feel that if some one did not see this video he becomes ill inform. There are a lot of credible business magazines that does not support that theory. If dissatisfied employees becomes the voice of reason the world is in trouble.
ReplyDeleteMayor Fred in my opinion is a breath of fresh air and similar to Mayor Wade. He can be trusted although I do not agree with all his decisions. He needs to remove some staff including Paul Shaker as he is too aligned with anti-development groups. I wish him all the best in the next election. I don't think the problem is him but some of the Councillors we elect. They don't care about the City as a collective only their own wards so they can be re-elected and gain pensionable time. I'd vote for Fred again no problem but if I had the opportunity to vote for everyone there are some present day Councillors that I wouldn't vote for including Brattina who supports a department that has squandered tax payers dollars.....Downtown Renewal.
ReplyDeleteOur Mayor speaks adamantly about corporate and union
ReplyDeletedonations at a time when, in his words, "public confi-
dence in elected officials and democratic institutions
(is) in decline, it is incumbent on us to explore every
measure to enhance the integrity of the political process."
Our Mayor used as proof of principle, priority and process,
his Winona decision. He also included a link to follow,
where he says, "I am not interested in using the tax-
payers money for legal fees just to make a point."
I would ask our Mayor about the Red Hill Creek
and the Dutch Bank suits, "what is the point?"
Our Mayor concludes with these words:
"I hope that when Hamiltonians look around,
they feel a sense of momentum; that the community
is moving in the more progressive direction they want.
That they can visualize the NEXT Hamilton –
an evolving economy, a vibrant arts sector,
a rapid transit plan worthy of a 21st century city,
a beautiful waterfront, and a greener
more environmentally aware city."
Mr. Eisenberger is well aware of the Legacy fund.
A $100M chunk of change from a very influential
CORPORATION. WE are well aware of what happens
when the waterfront begins to green over. When
we become more environmentally aware and use
less energy to save a buck, a pet corporation
of this city will continually jack up the rates
through Collaboration, Cooperation, and Consensus,
to preserve shareholders bottom line on "fixed costs."
Our Mayor chooses to call this "an evolving economy."
Hamilton hydro bill hike could be coming
http://thespec.com/News/Local/article/646727
Thanks for sharing Mayor Fred
Im cool with mayor Fred's answers. but he dodged number 6
ReplyDeleteElvis P
The Mayor says that special interests no longer have sway in the city. Nice pat on the back. Is it deserved? What do you call allowing the city to buy land near the airport from a local developer big shot? What do you call gifting the Connaught boys $18M in tax money for affordable housing while they are suing the city? What do you call gifting LIUNA $40M for the Lister project? What do you call paying rent to the City Center while they are behind in taxes....sure am glad special interests are now gone!
ReplyDeleteYves Dubeau: I did not say you were ill informed, the point I was trying to make was that if you did not watch the video, then you have discounted the voices of the workers, other small businessess that have been affected, the voices of workers across the globe, and other community groups who have special interests such as environmental.
ReplyDeleteWhy should we believe what is printed in magazines? I mean with the on-going battle between the upper echelons at HHS and the nurses, well, it seems that these two sides are far apart on their views.
http://www.thespec.com/article/640041
The voices of the workers are important, it gives us a picture of what is going on, whether the input is positive or negative.
Maybe I have a problem with an organization that continues to cut back on services to the public, yet has all the money in the world to fund high level public servants, which skirts the actual rules and guidelines set by the government.
http://www.thespec.com/article/648275
If you ask me, something is rotten in Denmark.
I would take it that you would disagree with the views in this video as well, since it is on youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pin8fbdGV9Y
Holy Cow I think the blog just slid
ReplyDeleteFor Pete's Sake!
While I believe in angels and the good deeds done
by those angelic of heart, I also can sense IT is
wise to know we can often times move too quickly ahead of them.
IT is like sh(ad)owing your hand too soon.
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/60831
Slow down Man,
What's the hurry Cal?
Rome wasn't built as a day plan
I got too wrapped up in Q4TT's links
I gotta work 9-5 and fix odd jobber stinks
Unclogging with snakes our church lady's sinks.
http://www.thehamiltonian.net/2009/10/10-tough-questions-with-mayor-fred.html#comments
You wants 10K hits and this topic was too hot?
Why let the good topics slide from their spot?
I'm disappointed Mr. Dubeau didn't poll the bit harder
while steering his position with the Tram-Law Trotters.
Cal, good evening...
ReplyDeleteI was wondering where this blog topic was at. I remember visiting your blog sometime last week and reading the advertisement of Fred Eisenberger answering 10 Tough Questions. Then I came here this weekend and couldn't find it right away until I scrolled down to the bottom of this blog....Ya, the bottom of this blog. Where else would I find Eisenberger?
Anyways Cal, all kidding aside. I was in Hamilton just the other day paying some friends a visit and I gotta tell you my friend the Hammer is looking pretty old, tired and beat up. I don't get to visit Hamilton as much as I would like to and was hoping to see some signs of improvements downtown and I didn't see any.
I've had a chance to read up on everyone's opinion here about Mayor Fred and how people think he's doing. Is he doing a good job? or is he doing a bad job? and when it's all said and done I don't think that's half as important as who would Eisenberger's biggest challenger be in the next municipal elections for the title of Mayor and the name that some people like to toss around is Terry Whitehead's and to me he's cut from the same cloth as Fred Eisenberger. Furthermore, if Whitehead turns out to be the only bonafide challenger for Eisenberger than I will make a very easy prediction right here and now and say to everyone that it's going to be a LANDSLIDE VICTORY for Eisenberger.
We have a lot of big problems in Hamilton, the first of which is not enough people come out to vote. Second biggest problem is we don't get enough good challengers for the Mayor's job in Hamilton. Thirdly, Most Hamiltonians don't care to come out and vote cause they feel the politicians don't listen to them. Last but not least Most Hamiltonians are ill informed which is exactly how the politicians and the city leaders, (The "Usual Suspects" as Harry Stinson likes to call them), like it and want it to be.
I will have PLENTY more to say about the Mayor, the councillors and Economic Development Department when it comes time to answer my 10 Tough Question on Halloween night!
Best Regards!
Rick Cordeiro