elections

[oneoff]

And the fact is that the "landslide" of voters are the one who voted a certain way.

The "handfuls" of votes for the loser are pretty easily identified by support that is shown well prior to the voting procedure.

So results are quite predictable ...in most cases.

Sort of like fixed and committed on all sides; unless the apathethic and disinchanted take some time to get out.

The problem being that in even in the best cases we are still dealing with less than may less than 100 votes in what is considered a great turnout.

[oneoff]

There are actually about (a) to (g) possible qualifications to vote (or run for office for that matter.)

They range from simple residency in the RM (not in villages, towns or cities as a great many don't understand or believe even after being so informed); to chief executive officers; to landowners who may be exempted from taxes; to licenced business and so forth; as well as spouuses of any of above; except CEO's. And no one may vote twice in any election.

Then total assessment comes into account for the division in which one can only cast a vote; and possibly proper notification to change ones voting division (if done in right time frame and under specific circumstances; only if you don't qualify by living within the municipality.

All that applies to an electorate who don't understand a fraction of what is included on the "voters declaration" that they must sign.

Just as that same electorate has not adequately informed themselves (in a great great many cases) about the many issues which might be considered before casting a truly "informed" vote.

But a cynic may well say that democracy doesn't guarantee good governments.

"exelent" and "landslide" may not even be in the dictionary; let alone the definitions of democratic principles

[oneoff]

All leading to asking

Where is the Voter's List?

That would happen if a council simply told the administrator (though a resolution) to create one.

[farmaholic]

All too often "incumbent equals acclaimed".

The situation I described couldn't have been predicted, two new people. And it was nice to see the close results.

R.M. Councillor is a thankless job in many cases

[farmaholic]

The sad part is because of such low voter turnout it is kind of obvious at times where allegiances lie during rural municipal elections.

I do find it odd that voter's lists aren't compiled. Maybe a little onerous but the current system is kind of an archaic honor system. What if a nominee wants a list of eligible voters to campaign with? Does anyone know of a vote that was challenged based on eligibility criteria?

[Oliver88]

Checking/sumdumguy-
In Saskatchewan you must own land or live in an RM to vote for the Reeve.
You must own land in a district or live in the district where councillors are running.
(This is how it was explained to me by an RM)

I am not in RM council but see guys doing a lot of work for minimal pay and appreciation......and a lot of coffee row experts complaining but not willing to put their name forward.

[jamesb]

Actually the election turnout in #3 was quite good. Some people don't have to like the results but democracy has spoken. I have seen elections where almost no one votes, that is a sad state of affairs.
Oneoff I would encourage you to run for council next year. If you have grievances that others agree with, why not run for reeve? If other ratepayers think the same as you, you should step up and run.

[Oliver88]

For voting for councillor you have to live in division or own land in division. not "district" as I wrote.

[oneoff]

Please read what I have previously written before glibbly saying "Run for reeve"

And it isn't good enough to say "I have been told" or "I understand"

The rules are clear if you read "the Local Goverment Elections Act" and the "Municipalities Act".

For instance it makes a world of difference between thinking "highest assessment of a quarter section" and highest total assessment in a division" are not different statements. And you'll quite probably find that in rural municipalities that if you meet the qualifications of a voter; then you have also met the nomination qualifications for a reeve or councillor...and further anyone could potentially legally become the reeve in one municipality; a councillor in another and mayor of a city provided that you did live in the urban municipality.

Thats what I understand and until corrected by the Municpalities Act and Local government Elections Act or an actual court ruling. I am willing to listen to any and all personal legal opinion or any person who has actually read these acts; there is no sense taking those opinions as gospel. There is a very good chance there is something totally inaccurate or wrong when it is secondhand and not based on careful reading, understanding fully, and careful interpretation. Any flaw in fact can fatally flaw the conclusion. Such as living within the boundaries of a town, village or city which happens to be enclosed within the boundaries of a larger municipality. That is apparently not understood by a good many wannabe voters. Some of those persons may indeed qualify to vote; and that is where it would be very helpful to have a voter's list.

Without such a list it ultimately solely up to those who fill out and sign the declaration form to decide if they are entitled to vote. And as such there is every possibility that any person can vote in any election they choose (and not be elegible in any way to have done so. That IS the way voting day is meant to be conducted. Of course; if the outcome is close, and if objections are made by "scrutineers" or "agent representatives; then the results of voting may not be completely final.

But returning officers and candidates representatives nor anyone else can interfere with casting any vote. Further it is not the RO; or DRO or poll clerk; or constable who should be telling anyone they can or can not vote. If asked they should be only saying who is eligble; and that is as thoughtfully as possible; already laid out in the "Local Government Elections Act". The "scrutineers" are the only persons who can cause a moment of reflection on the answers in the declaration; and it comes through the deputy returning officer who can ask the potential voter if they wish to contemplate on any answer on the form.
I could/would refer anyone to a Court of Queen's bench decision pertaining to an RM which sought "direction" (on SARM legal advice) that resulted in a very unexpected (but totally obvious) decision.

Not all people live in basements and have never escaped to the outside real world.

And I don't have the time to confirm and quote exactly the words surrounding the "I object" utter by a scrutineer and any elaboration that is in order that is directed to the DRO.

[oneoff]

The biggesst shock of all might be to remind a council that after the RO has been named by council; the election is in the hands of the election staff that gets enlisted outside council control.

I might get corrected on poll clerks

[mbdog]

Oneoff...what is your point? Read and reread your comments...all I gathered was you want a voters list? Have you been on council? Your sounding a bit hillbillyish

[oneoff]

That's a lot like asking where your brains are? Or even if you have a brain? Or do you know enough to see what a point is.

Can't you see?

[oneoff]

OK none of that last comment was called for; just as living in a basement or being a hillbilly is so far from being appropriate.

Try just these examples previously mentioned and see what you reaction is Outrage or support??

For instance; if some council in your area... or any other area was consecutively asked for at least two years to support the local high school yearbook fund raising committee;( by buying a quarter page advertisement in that publication)...... What would your reaction be if it were denied. Not because of lack of money. Not because one council member had a grievance; but a whole round the table outburst of apparently deeply held hatred based excuses expressed by every council member present before the vote. Especially if you knew that some $300 donation to some Regina "Agriculture in the Classroom" donation was considered money well spent?

Or as has been mentioned a couple times; some other municipality passing a resolution prohibiting use of all electronic devices within council chambers during council and committee meetings. Obviously and specifically designed to thwart any legitimate text communication with anyone else. Remember that sitting in a public gallery is not necessarily appreciated by those in group that aims for zero opportunities for ratepayers meetings; and fears "open mics " (microphones ) at public meetings.
Would you and any other potential voter also call that a little "hillbillyish" in this day and age ... or could you agree....unequivically.... that those were examples of the most mean spirited ; inappropriate and reprehensive behavior of any elected representative that you would ever expect to encounter.

And would you express outrage or just prefer to shoot the messenger?. Would you characterize that as an "exelent job"?

And remember that my comments are directed to any rural municipal council (of which there are way too many) and any ratepayer who ignores/condones such decisions by any council. My point is the general rot seen in more than one council.

Thats one point. Need I go further; because that should be enough.

[oneoff]

http://rmofmoosecreek.ca/January112012.pdf


motion 19/12. Anyone care to explain?

[mbdog]

oneoff...I'll disregard your comments towards me and take it as reflection of the kind of person I am dealing with.
I asked if you were ever on council? You obviously have contempt for these elected bodies, so I'm guessing no.
You also....if I read between the lines correctly...obviously have a stick up your ass regarding some or all councillors, decisions made, and the election/governing process.
You site a yearbook contribution that was denied...one you obviously disagreed with...I do not. There will always be disagreement on priorities/arguments regarding the use of public funds....which by the way are not unlimited in some taxpayers minds.
Banning electronic devices....well that's standard protocol just about everywhere....dunno what you're implying regarding thwarting legitimate communication. Do you want to video and post on social media? On a witch hunt?What?
Cameras and mic's in open council...have no problem with this, nor should any council.
In open council, you should have the right to present/speak to any/all concerns you have for all the world to see.
I ask again...have you been elected/ran for council or any other political position for that matter...maybe I'm questioning JT and don't know it...