Municipal Election 2010

Incumbent Councillors, Office Hours and Campaigning

By RTH Staff
Published October 01, 2010

In the following email correspondence with Tony Fallis, the City's Manager of Elections and Print & Mail, Ward 3 candidate Paul Tetley tries to establish a clear line between working and campaigning for incumbent councillors.

On September 30, Mr. Tetley sent the following email to Mr. Fallis:

This morning, at 10:50am, four of my campaign volunteers viewed Councillor Bernie Morelli going into TJ's Appliances on Barton Street, and then observed him in a neighbouring store personally taping up election posters in that storefront window. They talked with Bernie and questioned him regarding his campaigning on city time. He claimed he was on his time, but at 10:50am in the morning, I'm not clear how that is possible.

Is my understanding correct that an incumbent councillor can not campaign during his office hours? Is this a violation of the Municipal Election Act?

Fallis replied:

City Council members do not have set office hours.

Their schedules are determined by meetings, constituent needs, etc.

As such Councillor Morelli could very well have been on his own time.

Tetley replied:

Can you please confirm if my understanding that incumbent councillors can not campaign during their office hours (as set by them), is correct.

Fallis replied:

The problem is who knows what their hours are.

They set their own schedules and we have no way of knowing if they are working in the evening or during the day.

Tetley replied:

Forgetting what their office hours are, or aren't, my question is the following: Is my understanding correct that incumbents can not campaign on city time?

Fallis replied:

Again, only they know if they are on city time or not.

Candidate Pages

57 Comments

View Comments: Nested | Flat

Read Comments

[ - ]

By frank (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 08:15:06

It seems like someone has problems with reading comprehension...

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By nobrainer (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 08:26:59

Maybe Tony is saying, 'It doesn't matter what the rules say because theres no way to enforce them'

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By MattM (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 09:00:50

They're all sleeping in the same bed.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Gary Santucci (anonymous) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 09:10:09

On the RTH Election Site, it states that Councillor Morelli does not appear to have answered any of the questions. Well has he or hasn't he? (LOL)If you want know where and for whom he spends his time working, follow the link to his 2006 campaign contribution list.

http://www.paultetley.com/news.php

Gary Santucci

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By nobrainer (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 09:38:50

It says on the Financial statement that Bernie lives on London Street South. That's east of Ottawa Street ... Outside Ward 3?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By nobrainer (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 09:39:42

Also he spent more on a Voting Day Party than he spent on signs.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Andrea (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 09:40:33

Quick question - do we expect any elected official to punch a clock and work standard 9 - 5 office hours?
I have personally witnessed elected city officials attending evening meetings and I have also had email and telephone responses from several councillors as late as 10pm. Was that on their time or City time?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By nobrainer (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 09:44:11

Donor list is awesome. Homes by DeSantis, Mattamy Homes, Carmens, Liuna 837, Dufferin Construction, Spencer Creek Estates, Marz Homes, DeSozio Homes, Hi-Rise Group, Multi-Area Developments (DeSantis again), Spallaci, Effort Property.....

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By anon (anonymous) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 09:47:17

I guess Morelli doesn't have enough people willing to support him, so he has to put up the posters himself.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Gary Santucci (anonymous) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 09:48:33

I believe that the question revolves around what is fair and equitable to all of the candidates during and election campaign. Incumbents have an enormous advantage. Is that the intention in a democracy?

Gary Santucci

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By frank (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 09:49:56

Andrea, I have seen/had that as well. But that doesn't take away the fact that there's currently NO accountability for those incumbents. It's imperative that there's equity across the board for all parties running in the election.

Comment edited by frank on 2010-10-01 08:51:27

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 09:56:55

Donor list is awesome. Homes by DeSantis, Mattamy Homes, Carmens, Liuna 837, Dufferin Construction, Spencer Creek Estates, Marz Homes, DeSozio Homes, Hi-Rise Group, Multi-Area Developments (DeSantis again), Spallaci, Effort Property.....

Good to see Bernie tapping into his support in an effort to revitalize his ward....

Comment edited by jason on 2010-10-01 08:57:18

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Andrea (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 10:02:11

The Mayor has been attending four to five events per day.
Is he attending as the Mayor or is he campaigning? How do you realistically separate the two?

Should all elected officials be punching a clock and tracking their 'overtime' for four years so that when campaign time comes around they can say they are on 'lieu time'?

I do agree 100% about the accountability, I am just honestly trying to figure out how you would enforce it. It's just a sad reality of politics that an incumbent is always going to have the advantage - even based on name recognition alone. There are always going to be voters that are not engaged in the community and check of the box of the incumbebt thinking "he got voted in last time so he must be doing a good job". Are they accountable too?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By MattM (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 10:03:14

That donor list is not at all surprising. The same familiar names that basically control this city.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Fred Street (anonymous) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 10:41:34

Behaviour like this is slippery, agreed. Perception is reality, and the savvy incumbent would be tracking lieu time, as has been suggested. Even so, incumbents usually have a tactical home field advantage.

The one thing you could (and should) reasonably do is to disallow "Ward Update" political literature and the like to be printed and distributed on the public dime once the door opens for challengers in the spring. It's just info propaganda, and sometimes it's as discerning as a daisy-cutter: Less than two weeks ago I received just that kind of paper from Councillors Bratina and McHattie, even though I'm smack-dab in the middle of Ward 2.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By birdie (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 11:15:02

The incumbent advantage is huge. All you have to do is show up and not screw up and you get reelected.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By mystoneycreek (registered) - website | Posted October 01, 2010 at 11:25:25

It's just a sad reality of politics that an incumbent is always going to have the advantage - even based on name recognition alone. There are always going to be voters that are not engaged in the community and check of the box of the incumbebt thinking "he got voted in last time so he must be doing a good job". Are they accountable too?

I'll certainly be addressing this on my own blog because there are at least two salient issues that deserve being addressed. But for now, this:

-I find it hilarious this notion of 'advantage' on the parts of incumbents. Such a demonizing group we've become, so quick to create an 'Us vs Them' mentality. Can you imagine this in the private sector? Where the 'incumbent' in a position is regarded as having an 'unfair advantage'? To me, if we were more satisfied with how Councillors performed/behaved, we'd be far less likely to see things this way. Which leads me to...

-I am constantly harping on about 'unqualified opinions'. This is germane to this discussion for two reasons: Firstly, that the last municipal election saw a turnout rate of 37%. And secondly, that it's been said that 60% of the votes cast were made on the basis of 'name recognition' alone. That's what I'd call a mass example of 'unqualified opinions'.

I'm also harping on about the concept of increasing the 'relationship of engagement' between residents and their Councillors. (Not the other way around, which is an entirely different discussion.) The editorials I've written are labelled 'Civic Engagement', and once again I have to point out that this passion of mine in this area was very much inspired by Editor Ryan several months back.

So to answer your question; "Yes, voters are 'accountable'. Not that many would agree to this view. But that's the default behaviour we're going to have to migrate to if we reasonably expect any sea change in the kind of local governance we get. Because to me, simply voting in a new crop, assuming because they're 'fresh blood' they're somehow endemically more apt to perform better than 'seasoned vets' is a particularly scary mindset.

If we want change, it has to come from us. Not the politicians.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Mark-Alan Whittle (anonymous) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 12:21:25

Of course politicians electioneer constantly. As to working hours, look at the meeting minutes. Many, many councillors don't show up, or leave early. Challengers, on the other hand, are free to electioneer 24/7, unless they already have a job. The complaint sounds like sour grapes to me. One thing for sure, Bernie will need more than 4,000 votes to win this time. He can retire easily, just like Bratina is planning to do, after playing Kingmaker in the Mayoralty race. Tetley will win, IMHO.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By z jones (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 12:30:20

Challengers, on the other hand, are free to electioneer 24/7

Yeah but my taxes aren't paying them to do it.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By mrjanitor (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 13:11:17

I found this article very petty and unbecoming of RTH.

-These incumbents do work very unusual hours with much of the work done in the evening. If somebody has time in the day to do campaigning so be it.

-Are people actually suggesting that an incumbent should not campaign.

-Paul Tetley and his volunteers come across looking very anal and controlling.

-I'm all for change in Ward 3, and Paul Tetley certainly appears to be the man to bring that. What I am finding is the Paul Tetley slant on RTH is becoming as overt as Hamilton Spectator's Andrew Drechsler's 10 year love fest with Larry DiIaini. Paul seems like a good guy and a very involved citizen who has the goods to win the ward. Just realize you come across looking like a whiny ass with both the exchange and that you exerted influence to have this BS posted on RTH. Really Paul, you seem to be much better than this.

Comment edited by mrjanitor on 2010-10-01 12:23:13

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Gary Santucci (anonymous) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 13:23:16

I don't believe it is the policy of RTH to censor or block any submissions or posts by any other candidates. I see that only a minority of the candidates have posted anything on the site or have engaged in the discussions or have submitted articles or have answered all of the questions on the RTH Election Site.

Gary Santucci

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By mrjanitor (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 13:35:02

Who wrote this? I only see 'RTH staff' for the author. Is Paul RTH staff?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By briggs (anonymous) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 13:37:47

"Challengers, on the other hand, are free to electioneer 24/7", but then challengers would need to stop working, i.e. unpaid leave of absence, and councillors would still be collecting a paycheque.

seems like councillors have diplomatic immunity just like the south african guy in the lethal weapon moves. "you caught me, but i have councillor immunity", and i would love to see that revoked.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By realfreeenterpriser (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 13:57:48

"Is my understanding correct that incumbents can not (sic) campaign on city time?"

To the very best of my knowledge, your understanding is incorrect. The Municipal Act governs Councillors and the only prohibitions of which I'm aware deal with things like pecuniary interest.

I believe the city has rules about using city resources such as stationary and personel for "personal" us but, realistically, who would enforce them and what would the penalty be?

Whether you like Bernie Morelli or not, this sounds a tad petty.

Incumbents undoubtedly have an advantage in municipal politics. The only meaningful solution is term limits and I'm not seeing anyone running on that platform.

Fulltime positions, filled with people many of whom would have difficulty finding better paying employment elsewhere, don't make for good decision making. That's, at least, part of the reason the "suburbs" find amalgamation so distasteful. They were used to parttime politicians who, generally speaking, viewed public office as a calling rather than a job, clearly, weren't in it for the money, did their time and moved on.

I've always been of the opinion that Hamilton Council would function infinitely better if it was twice the size with half (or less) the salary. That, combined with term limits, would go a long way toward a more vibrant, "representative" democracy.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 14:08:36

-I'm all for change in Ward 3, and Paul Tetley certainly appears to be the man to bring that. What I am finding is the Paul Tetley slant on RTH is becoming as overt as Hamilton Spectator's Andrew Drechsler's 10 year love fest with Larry DiIaini. Paul seems like a good guy and a very involved citizen who has the goods to win the ward. Just realize you come across looking like a whiny ass with both the exchange and that you exerted influence to have this BS posted on RTH. Really Paul, you seem to be much better than this.

I gotta say, I agree with this comment.
I know it's tough to be a new candidate, but suck it up and inform the residents of the horrible track record of the incumbent (in case they always walk around their ward with their eyes closed) and promote your new agenda. I'm never a fan of divisive or accusatory politics.
Nothing is quite as gross as Dreschel's love-fest with DiIanni, but MrJanitor, your point is well taken.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Kiely (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 14:26:34

What I am finding is the Paul Tetley slant on RTH is becoming as overt as Hamilton Spectator's Andrew Drechsler's 10 year love fest with Larry DiIaini. - mrjanitor

"Ed Murrow told his generation of journalists bias is okay as long as you don't try to hide it." - Bill Moyer

Whether you like Bernie Morelli or not, this sounds a tad petty. - realfreeenterpriser

And do we not have enough pettiness on council already?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 14:42:15

I don't see any Paul Tetley slant on RTH. I think the slant you'll find on RTH is one that desires to see vibrant, safe, livable, open-for-business urban neighbourhoods in Hamilton. I work in Ward 3 and would LOVE to see this begin to happen there. If Tetley can get the process started, then more power to him.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Serendipity (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 15:00:52

"I found this article very petty and unbecoming of RTH."

mrjanitor, I tend to agree with you; indeed, the article is very petty. I'm saddened that RTH posted it.

I have known, volunteered for, and respected a handful of councillors in my time. They, hopefully, read staff reports and take the time to listen to constituents. They attend meetings, hopefully full informed of the issues before them and make decisions on behalf of their constituents. That's a Councillor's job. Those meetings - Public Works, Economic Development, COW, Council, etc... - take place in the morning, afternoon, and evening. I have known Councillors to work weekends, a hell of a lot of them. And evenings too when they don't have a meeting but a constituent, like me, receives a call back to my inquiry made days prior.

I don't always like my Councillor but I always respect them for what they do. As much as I would like to take a stab at running, I would never ever commit to the devotion of time which I think for most Councillors is 18/7.

As for Mr. Morelli, I neither know him nor live in Ward 3, but when asked by Tetley's volunteers if he was on City or his time, he answered, honestly I'm assuming, that he was on his time.

Until a few weeks ago I didn't even know the City had a Manager of Elections but I had a question, called City Hall, and was put in touch with Tony Fallis. He was lovely, very helpful and delivered my answers in a very timely manner. Tony was taking work home because he couldn't respond to all the emails he received during the day. I'm sorry, and saddened somewhat, that such a man's name has been brought to near-tarnishing on RTH.

It all seems so clear to me: Tetley's volunteers ask Morelli if he's on the City's time or his own. Morelli answers, honestly I assume as I trust people to be honest, upfront. Tetley's volunteers tell Tetley. I assume Tetley doesn't believe Morelli so he writes Fallis an email with two valid questions and receives the correct and honest answers from Fallis.

How wonderful it would have been if Tetley thanked Fallis and they both went on their merry way. But, no, the story takes a twist for the worst after that.

Mr Tetley, since you are a candidate for Ward 3, I would have hoped that you were fully aware that your life will not be the same if you are elected. You'll get calls, emails, all hours of day and night, and four years from now you'll be taking some time off during your time (but it will be a Friday morning so people will think you're on City time because they don't know you've put in 60 hours of City work already and the week isn't over yet) to campaign. I have heard good things about you but this is very unbecoming behaviour. If I may: slow down, have a good meal, and start believing that people do tell the truth, even if you don't want to hear it.
As well, I hope you will think twice before abusing a City staffer's time again and never repeat what you heaped on to Mr. Fallis.

Why this piece was credited to RTH staff is baffling to me, but at this point I really don't want to know.

Mr. Santucci, I think the way RTH rolls sometimes is why the majority of candidates do not respond to answers.

One last heartfelt word for Mr. Tetley - Karma.

Mr. Fallis, if you're reading, I'm sorry you got dragged into the mud here, should have never, ever happened.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Kevin B (anonymous) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 15:58:42

RTH articles are often biased- This is not a criticism- The editorial slant on this website is an activist one. I'm sure that Mr McGreal, Leach, etc would happily admit that they favour certain candidates/policies/viewpoints over others. There's nothing wrong with that as long as it isn't disguised as straight-up journalism.

But I agree that the above article is in poor taste and likely would not have been written about Mr. McHattie or Mayor Fred.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By adrian (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 16:51:57

Who wrote this? I only see 'RTH staff' for the author. Is Paul RTH staff?

In response to this, and to those who talk about a bias towards Tetley in this article: the article contains virtually no content written by anyone from RTH, except for an introduction explaining what is going on. It consists entirely of portions of an email exchange between Tony Fallis, the City's Manager of Elections and Print & Mail and Ward 3 candidate Paul Tetley.

You could accurately say that the article was written by Fallis and Tetley, although it was not posted by either.

How can that be biased? Both sides of the conversation are clearly shown, and it is up to you to decide to agree with Tetley, or Fallis, or neither.

Is this blog-worthy? I believe it is, because it is interesting, germane, and provokes discussion.

I agree that the above article is in poor taste and likely would not have been written about Mr. McHattie or Mayor Fred.

If Tony Greco, challenger in Ward 1, were to write an email to Tony Fallis claiming similar things about McHattie, absolutely we would write about it. Remember, this is not an article about Morelli, it's simply a copy of correspondence between Tetley and a city official that is about Morelli.

When Chapman accused DiIanni of fraud in the campaign before last, were media organizations that talked about her claim guilty of being biased against DiIanni?

Comment edited by administrator adrian on 2010-10-01 15:57:45

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By mrjanitor (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 17:09:18

Adrian,

I disagree that article was written by Tetley and Fallis. The author is listed as RTH staff, why is that? Because someone from RTH staff decided to post it. My personal feeling is that Mr. Tetley showed questionable judgment in having this posted here, by who we really don't know, other than it's RTH staff. You CANNOT accurately say this was written by both parties, as one person most likely assumed this was a private discussion.

I also disagree you can call this little tantrum of Mr. Tetley's blog worthy, unless you are one of his sycophants. I do not think this article is biased towards Paul Tetley, I think the current focus of the leaders of this site is. That's OK, I don't think for a second anyone is claiming otherwise, but let's call a duck a duck.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By mrjanitor (registered) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 17:15:23

I only remember poor Ms. Chapman being mercilessly ridiculed and harassed by Andrew Dreschler, Graham McKay and The Spectator in general. I only wish some of the local media supported like she deserved. I'm sure the View was there for her, I hope.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By WhatIs (anonymous) | Posted October 01, 2010 at 17:41:07

I see nothing bad here towards Tony fallis, what I see is a process like many others that is broken. What I see is circular reasoning and no oversight for councillors. Why do you think this is a slight, or an abuse of staff time. Valid question asked, partially answered. The staffer in question is tasked with managing the election, and that is what occurred

No doubt councillors work many hours, so do many others, but others cant simply turn on city/company time and then personal time like a light switch. That is not only weird it is scary with a public official. Shouldn't they have been campaigning for 4 years already?

Obviously rth staff that this was post worthy, so they did. If you don't like, so be it. You can't please all the people all the time. I'm sure mr. Tetley is hoping karma works, because I get a strong feeling it would work in his favor against a 20 year incumbent.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 02, 2010 at 10:26:20

Funny how one posted email exchange can have RTH accused of having making Tetley look childish and accused of supporting Tetley. The lowest common function of intelligence is the auto-complain reflex.
Best to just ignore it.

RTH has posted nasty email exchanges involving Whitehead, Bratina, Merulla etc..... the real issue is bringing some of this discourse to the public light.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 02, 2010 at 13:52:28

Ryan, I think some people still have a tough time with the concept that the world doesn't operate in a narrow 'left v right' box. Too many people get their info from US media sources and even some in Canada that preach this strange belief system that says you must disagree with everything that comes from the mouth of a person who votes for a different political party than you. The very last thing I will ever base my life on is political corporations (parties) or political beliefs.
You and I are a good example. We probably have never voted for the same party and probably never will for the rest of our lives. Who cares? We both understand the need for proper city-building and urban principles. It's sad to see people who have stopped thinking for themselves and instead allow political divisiveness to guide their lives instead of their own principles.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By mrjanitor (registered) | Posted October 02, 2010 at 15:46:29

"The lowest common function of intelligence is the auto-complain reflex. Best just to ignore it."

Sounds like great advice for Mr. Tetley, let's hope he takes it in the future.

"It's sad to see people who have stopped thinking for themselves and instead allow political divisiveness to guide their lives instead of their own principles."

I've seen quite a bit of that here since I started following RTH.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 02, 2010 at 16:22:20

Sounds like great advice for Mr. Tetley, let's hope he takes it in the future.

Agreed.

I've seen quite a bit of that here since I started following RTH.

Please elaborate.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Piffer (anonymous) | Posted October 02, 2010 at 17:30:00

I like reading RTH. I find the commentary intelligent. The only exception is the banal stuff that "Jason" prints. It seldom has a point and rarely stands up to even the slightest scrutiny. Jason, if that is your real name: use an Alias. At least then we wouldn't attribute all of the world's inanity on your puny brain.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By Piffer (anonymous) | Posted October 02, 2010 at 17:31:44

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 Jarod (registered) | Posted October 02, 2010 at 17:58:11

Trolls fall into troll sized holes as they walk.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By mrjanitor (registered) | Posted October 02, 2010 at 18:02:35

Jason,

For reference on your request for elaboration please read any thread that relates the The Pearl Company in the last month or so. I feel that I have made my viewpoints known as clear as I am able. In summary I have found as much dogma on display here as on any other board, left or right. I have also seen many thoughtful, well rounded presentations of position as with any other board, left or right. Have a read and if that doesn't answer your request for elaboration I'll get back to you. I also have a lengthy trail on anything West Harbour or relating to Bob Young and the Tiger-Cats.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jason (registered) | Posted October 02, 2010 at 23:10:17

Have a read and if that doesn't answer your request for elaboration I'll get back to you.

Thanks for the reply. I see where you're coming from. I originally thought you were suggesting that there was some higher power on RTH ordering the tone or opinions on various issues.
Your observations largely seem correct - many folks who comment on RTH seem to share similar views on urban issues. The main difference in my mind is that they all previously felt the way they do about urban issues and are happy to have found a local outlet with a similar slant.
I'm not aware of anyone who will go and vote based on what they read on RTH. However I am aware of many people who will go and vote based solely on who the Spec tells them to vote for. Maybe I'm a little off base, but I think there is a big difference between the two. Granted, you can't really blame the Spec or any other outlet if people choose to treat it as dogma. Maybe in 30 years RTH will have the same problem??

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By EugeneM (registered) | Posted October 03, 2010 at 12:07:20

Ok, here are my thoughts after reading this and the following things seem obvious:

1) If Bernie Morelli had been seen taping up signs on a Saturday or Sunday, this would have been a non-issue.

2) He was seen on a weekday, well into office hours when he could/should have been dealing with the issues of residents within his Ward (my unresolved issues for example! Answer my email/phone messages Bernie!).

3) Paul Tetley's volunteers vs Bernie Morelli in person - had they been Morelli volunteers this would have been a non-issue.

4) Paul Tetley would probably like equally flexible work hours in order to split campaigning and working and have a level playing field.

5) This information is not petty, it is informative. Councillors and their actions should be transparent and accountable to the people who they represent and pay their salaries. It certainly soured my opinion of Morelli further.

6) Why was Fallis giving evasive, defensive answers?

7) There is a serious lack of investigative journalism in this city's press. RTH volunteers get the closest. I still haven't seen any official questioning of Sean Gibson over this http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/general/let...

8) Morelli should be above reproach, he is the incumbent. He shouldn't be seen doing anything questionable. He clearly is not.

9) RTH can publish anything it wants to bring things to people's attention. That is the duty of journalism.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jimharvie (registered) - website | Posted October 06, 2010 at 08:12:25

My take on this article is that an email exchange was posted so we could all see how the question of appropriate campaigning was not answered by the city clerks office. This raises the question of whether the clerk is really in a position to enforce the rules, and therefore the effect is to have no rules. The comments about pettiness are valid if this was a "look-this guy is out putting signs up during office hours". If it was "hey i would like to know if this is permitted or not" then these questions deserve an answer. I suspect the city clerk was trying to explain why he cannot answer the question, but it reads like a cover up for the incumbent. All the comments about incumbent advantage and voter disengagement raise very good, but I think separate issues than the one this article was aiming at.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By EugeneM (registered) | Posted October 06, 2010 at 10:32:39

I raise 9 points and get 11 votes and no answers. I'm impressed.

jimharvie raises a valid point, people are seeing one side of the story and not the other.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By againstthemilitia (registered) | Posted October 07, 2010 at 11:27:48

The common concern I have with Tetley, is that his entire existence seems to be based on a negative campaign, with little or no solid direction of his own. As a software salesman, relatively recent resident to the city, and clearly absent of the dynamics that Hamiltonians are living with, I am offended by his constant arrogance to all who oppose him. He is the worst possible leader, and has already demonstrated his inability to represent all of the wards residents. His "clique" mentality should raising flags for us all. I have seen him personally take an underhanded approach to many issues, not to mention a radical vigilante mentality towards our own residents. On transparency, why has he changed his website content to suit his election so drastically? I don't mean his personal page by the way, I'm talking about hamiltonpropertystandards.com (his creation). All of the resident homes he chose to publically attack, with no regard to the full story behind them? Public flogging without a trial? Ignore the legal process? Why are they suddenly removed from that site? And about Councillor Morelli's hours; Tetley himself should have some recollection of the evenings the Councillor spends working with all of the different charity groups, neighborhood associations, etc. I have absolutely no concern about his "declared" hours at work, as I and many other have seen before, he doesn't stop working. For once I would love to hear not what Tetley "wants" to do, but how he would do it. I already know he doesn't like the existing Councillor, and he has no respect for the other candidates, so, what's next? Time for a new song, buddy. Yours has gotten really old.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By EugeneM (registered) | Posted October 07, 2010 at 16:12:13

I just ran a whois search on that domain name and this came up.

Domain Name: HAMILTONPROPERTYSTANDARDS.COM
Registrar: 1 & 1 INTERNET AG
Whois Server: whois.schlund.info
Referral URL: http://REGISTRAR.SCHLUND.INFO
Name Server: NS57.1AND1.COM
Name Server: NS58.1AND1.COM
Status: ok
Updated Date: 07-nov-2009
Creation Date: 06-nov-2008
Expiration Date: 06-nov-2010

How do you link that site to Tetley or anyone for that matter?

recent resident to the city

My understanding is that he's lived here for about two years and that his wife is Hamiltonian. I've been in the city less than a year. I can vote. I have an opinion. I could have run for council if I'd wanted to!

his constant arrogance to all who oppose him

Please give an example

radical vigilante mentality towards our own residents

Again please give an example

And about Councillor Morelli's hours; Tetley himself should have some recollection of the evenings the Councillor spends working with all of the different charity groups, neighborhood associations, etc.

Are these in his capacity as Councillor or private citizen? As I understand things, he cannot campaign and be a Councillor at the same time. The email conversation is clearly asking for a clarification of these rules...

Is my understanding correct that incumbents can not campaign on city time?

And NO answer was given. Fallis did not say whether he can or cannot campaign on city time. He just gave some noncommittal response about who can tell when it's city time or not. That wasn't answering the question asked.

I would love to hear not what Tetley "wants" to do, but how he would do it.

A lot of campaigning about what a candidate wants to see for the Ward and whether or not you as a resident want to see the same thing. I've read Tetley's site. There's a lot of "would" information there as well as the "want".

Again, while I have never met the man, I know someone who's been to one of his talks and he never mentioned his competition beyond Morelli who has a reason to be ashamed of his nearly 20 year track record of letting the ward decline.

Comment edited by EugeneM on 2010-10-07 15:18:04

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By snookumzs (anonymous) | Posted October 09, 2010 at 22:22:19

I can appreciate how emotionally charged individuals can become, when debating what they feel is best for their neighborhoods...but a lot of what I'm hearing, is starting to sound slanderous and childish. I too live in ward 3 and know most of the individuals indicated in this thread. Sadly, I think the only certain outcome from this electoral debate, is a lot of intolerance, and pitting of neighbor against neighbor. The 'Tetley' tactics have torn our neighborhood apart.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By EugeneM (registered) | Posted October 09, 2010 at 23:05:14

What "tactics" are you referring to exactly?

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By anon (anonymous) | Posted October 10, 2010 at 11:28:05

snookumzs, "The 'Tetley' tactics have torn our neighborhood (sic) apart." I disagree. Tetley is giving a voice to those in the neighbourhood who want clean and safe alleys, those who insist on the maintenance of property standards, and the enforcement of the city bylaws.

againstthemilitia, I checked out your reference to hamiltonpropertystandards.com. Thank you EugeneM for the whois search. Contrary to accusation, the site has not been modified since 07-nov-2009. The common thread on all of these photos is anti-police and anti-law and order. I think a name like 'against the militia' says a great deal about your moral and ethical quality and lack there of. You must be one of the taggers spray painting my back fence, or perhaps one of the prostitutes trolling on King St. Was it your drug house that was put out of business?

Thank you jimharvie,

"an email exchange was posted so we could all see how the question of appropriate campaigning was not answered by the city clerks office. This raises the question of whether the clerk is really in a position to enforce the rules, and therefore the effect is to have no rules. The comments about pettiness are valid if this was a "look-this guy is out putting signs up during office hours". If it was "hey i would like to know if this is permitted or not" then these questions deserve an answer. I suspect the city clerk was trying to explain why he cannot answer the question, but it reads like a cover up for the incumbent."

which leads back to the real topic "Incumbent Councillors, Office Hours and Campaigning".

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By snookumzs (anonymous) | Posted October 10, 2010 at 21:12:38

anon, a negative campaign is rarely a successful one. I know who I won't be voting for...and that's the 'software salesman who throws dog crap at people'!

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jimharvie (registered) - website | Posted October 10, 2010 at 23:17:29

Snookumzs has an interesting take on reality. I know that Tetley once watched from his deck as a dog owner, (as the cowardly ones do) ignored his dog crapping in the alley. Myself I would have picked it up and set fire to it on the coward slime ball pigs porch, but then I am a nut-bar and not running for council. Tetley picked it up and followed the jerk home, saying sarcastically, I believe this is yours. It was after Paul had walked a good way down the alley that the cowards expletives rang out and it was the dog owner who threw the dog crap. He then yelled out that only a nut (actually he swore something foul, but there is no need for that here) would follow someone down the alley with dog crap, and flung it down the alley in the direction of Tetley, whose response was to laugh, and point out that only a nut would throw shit down an alley. (shit is a technical term to us plumbers). That was the story I got from Paul the day after it happened. Snookums has heard the story twisted enough to have it completely reversed, and being a Morelli sycophant, is ready to believe the worst. Snookums is probably not the real name of the poster. That would take courage. That would be accountability. That is a concept totally foreign to Snookums.

Comment edited by jimharvie on 2010-10-10 22:18:53

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By jimharvie (registered) - website | Posted October 10, 2010 at 23:22:11

BTW none of this is addressing the question. When is campaigning allowed for an incumbent? The answer is that they are always campaigning. Their work is to get re-elected. I don't see how that will get changed by re-electing those that exemplify this behaviour.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By snookumzs (anonymous) | Posted October 11, 2010 at 08:44:52

jimharvie, you have not proven anything, in regards to incumbent campaigning hours. This is little more than mud slinging, and a pitiful attempt to derail Morelli's campaign. However, you and a few other Tetley supporters, are doing an excellent job derailing Tetleys.

To assume that I'm a Morelli supporter would be...well just that, an assumption. I'm actually very interested to hear what Black has to say and listen to a bit more of his platform. I'm starting to think he may be a very good candidate. He doesn't have an 'army of bullying, radical, vigilantes' helping him campaign like 'Team Tetley'.

As for my lack of courage and accountability, with regards to my identity...you have certainly demonstrated why a person would feel threatened by revealing it. Maybe, my alias shouldn't be Snookumzs but frightenedneighbor.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By fed up (anonymous) | Posted October 11, 2010 at 11:14:12

It appears that several people here are trolls. For heaven's sake, grow up, discuss the issues.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By playnice (anonymous) | Posted October 11, 2010 at 12:33:51

Hmmm, now there's a way to get people discussing the hard issues. Publicly chastise contributers, by calling them trolls and to grow up. I guess I'll have to keep my thoughts to myself out of fear also.

Permalink | Context

[ - ]

By coach handbags outlet (anonymous) | Posted April 17, 2011 at 22:06:39

Thank you for your nice post,i like it very much!

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