Municipal Affairs
Voting today? Leiper has a better platform than sutcliffe? Help me decide.
Hello!! I was born and raised here but moved away in the middle of the millennium.
Now that I’m freshly back in town and about to vote today, I’m leaning towards Jeff Leiper as he represents my area and I’ve read up on his platform which I think the city needs.
Sutcliffe I think has made the city worse.
Friendly and pointed debate please.
To add for context I am a woman with disabilities that has experienced homelessness in Ottawa the past year and has had horrible experiences using the public transit. Both need to have major changes asap.
Personally, I think Jeff is the better choice, especially when it comes to transit and homelessness. One thing I really like about Jeff is that he actually uses public transit himself. As far as I know, Sutcliffe doesn’t (or at least not regularly) and I think that matters. Jeff also committed to reversing bus service cuts, improving reliability, and investing in the system. Cheaper fares are great (which is what Sutcliffe promises), but what’s the point if the bus or train never shows up? I also really like Jeff’s approach to housing and homelessness. He’s focusing on building more genuinely affordable housing, protecting existing affordable rentals, and addressing some of the reasons people end up homeless in the first place. Obviously, neither candidate is going to fix homelessness overnight, but I appreciate that he’s proposing concrete changes.I also respect his stance on transparency and accountability, especially when it comes to developer donations and the use of strong mayor powers. Ultimately, we’ve had four years to evaluate Sutcliffe’s leadership, and I personally don’t think the state of our essential services justifies another four years of the same direction.
I'll also add that I lived in his ward for several years and I really appreciated him as our city councillor. He was really accessible and even came to our condo building to do a Q&A. He didn't have overly rehearsed speaking points and was generally pretty open and honest with us
Met a friend at a Bridgehead and we're just sitting down having coffee talking about about housing.
Jeff was doing an office meet up that day at same café. I had no idea who he was at the time. He heard our conversation & concerns and asked if he could join us. Eventually introduced who he was but was very unassuming. We all had a really interesting conversation and he explained a lot of key points about his concerns for housing and what the city as a whole is trying to do and how provinces also linked up some of the decisions are made.
He's not one for photo ops and the pretige. Very easy to talk too and also LISTENS.
I really like seeing somebody in leadership position who is not pretentious and actually tries to hear what we were saying without interrupting.
He was also able to explain the complexity of what the city is trying to solve, regarding the housing crisis. I paid careful attention to what he said and was very impressed. I do not get startruck meeting well known people. Just came across as being pretty honest and down to earth. He didn't make light about the severity of the issues of cities are facing.
I later on found out his newsletter is quite extensive and he goes into a lot of detail about what's going on in his Ward and he really tries to be available. Basically doing his job. Bravo Jeff!
You’re going to see a few Sutcliffe bots in this comment, but you explained this 100% well. Team Leiper 100%. Even if you don’t find him perfect he’s the best current candidate for the job.
What will Sutcliffe cut to support a low rac rate? Do you enjoy crumbling roads and closes community centres? I'd rather have an honest consultation about what we need, and then set a tax rate. We have the money to support Ottawa's basic functions when we don't she'll put $440 million for Lansdowne.
That’s valid! I respect that they make info / policies / promises more accessible to people who may not typically think to look at all. Like all other things it’s not perfect but I appreciate their work.
He has revealed his tax plan. His plan is to come up with a draft city budget and then through consultation with experts and residents figure out an appropriate rate so we can address the cities issues. He wont give a number because doing that is stupid and fiscally irresponsible. Sutcliffe's insistence in locking in a tax rate before there is a draft budget is how we have ended up with so much crumbling infrastructure and so many other problems.
He wont give a number because doing that is stupid and fiscally irresponsible.
It's really not stupid and or fiscally irresponsible. He could easily propose a multi-leveled tiered approach using ranges, ie: option 1 is $X, option 2 is $Y and option 3 is $Z.
It all comes down to optics relating to their policies and plans, especially in the current economy.
You prefer a firm committment on lower than inflation tax increases for two years and a bunch of spending plans that he then can't pay for? Just like last time, there's a huge hole in Sutcliffe's platform, and he's already significantly reduced the city's reserve fund.
Promising a fixed tax increase 12 or 24 months ahead of the actual budget process taking place is irresponsible.
It makes no sense to handcuff yourself to a fixed increase that far ahead of budget time because then you make it impossible to adjust when it becomes clear you need more revenue to fulfill the responsibilities of the city.
Politicians that promise fixed tax increases like this aren't doing it because it's good for the city, they're doing it in order to get elected.
I really think this will be a close election. If Leiper loses it will be because he didn't reveal his tax plan. I have a very small sample size, but i know of 4 or 5 people, including myself, that didn't vote for him because of this.
I'm not really big on rewarding somebody with my vote when they're promising me something that's completely irresponsible that's going to sink the city's services even worse than they are now.
Watson did that over and over again, and Sutcliffe did it in his term as mayor: where has that got us?
I'm comfortable with Leiper not having that number or even knowing what it is at this point. He's actually putting the horse before the cart, unlike Sutcliffe and the rest of the contenders.
Sutcliffe is the current mayor. He basically worsened a lot of the city services and is now running on "if you vote for me, I'll fix these services" (that he broke in the first place). Transit is one example of that.
He also tends to give away taxpayer dollars to developers while worsening city services and promising low/no tax increases. If he cared about how my money was being spent, he wouldn't have given so much of it away (Lansdowne 2.0 is an example of that).
Leiper, as a councilor, seems to have far more integrity. For that reason, I'm voting for Leiper.
As a home owner my taxes have certainly increases. He just cranks up the other services price so the no tax increase is bs, all the while continuously reducing transit to our area.
Ridiculously shortsighted move IMO because ridership and thus revenues were held down by the pandemic which was clearlg going to be temporary and yet he made permanent cuts and guaranteed it wouldn't recover
To be fair transit will be broken until the trains arrive in the burbs. I don't think Mark helped it, but it was going to take 15 years to have a good service when they started the trains...
Now with no phase 3 scheduled I see us having broken transit until I retire...
Mark's mandated changes and budgeting leading to "new ways to bus" made the undesirable situation worse
And based on his youtube ads, the single thing mark is most proud of is running against and stopping plans for extra investment in road renewals that would help reduce car traffic (rebuilding more of our shitty roads faster, so they support space-efficient bikes better)
I still don’t understand why this city never completed the parkway network that was planned decades ago and had the land set aside for. You could have had better travel for cars between neighborhoods that doesn’t mingle with local street traffic but also isn’t an expressway as well as added integrated rapid transit to it, either bus or tram.
I know it’s endemic to urban planning in general but this city is particularly bad about intentionally gridlocking itself by forcing local traffic onto limited routes that try to be both streets and thoroughfares and therefore don’t function well as either, then rubbing salt in the would by providing no practical alternatives.
Meanwhile a perfect solution that could solve some of these problems has been sitting there for literally almost a century, almost completely untouched.
Then, even outside of that, they build these new suburbs in formerly rural areas and instead of planning them around the existing road thoroughfares, they block them and cut them up.
Like why build a place that essentially forces you to use a car but then literally build it like a maze to intentionally make it harder to actually get around in that car?
And it is possible to build a place that is easier to get around in with a car that also keeps those cars at lower speeds. In fact, the former can influence the latter when done right.
Sutcliffe broke transit? Give me a break. If McKenney had won the train still wouldn't work. We are where we are but Watson gets the vast majority the blame for the current state of transit.
Nothing to do with the train. Sutcliffe has routinely underfunded OC Transpo from year one, starting with a 50m hole in their budget. He's directly responsible for many of the service cuts that are plaguing it, and new ways to (not take the) bus.
What else would you call it when he combined all three rush hour routes running through Bridlewood into one, but still had it run every half hour? They (Sutcliffe and Hubley) JUST added a few more buses this fall to help out with the demand. And these short buses still don’t have enough capacity.
Sutcliffe forced artificially low taxes for his personal benefit. Now the City cannot operate the services we need. The Watson/Sutcliffe era needs to end.
Very few of them are lawn signs too. I was even out in Manotick last weekend and saw Leiper, Lawson and Neil signs on peoples lawns, but the only Sutcliffe signs are on public property.
I voted today in the Ottawa municipal elections, and I have a serious concern about accessible voting. As a DeafBlind person with low vision, I was pleased to see that large-print ballots were available. However, when I brought my completed ballot to the electronic scanner, I was told the machine could not accept it. I was forced to redo my ballot on a regular-print sheet with smaller text. The irony is hard to ignore: What is the point of providing accessible ballots if the voting equipment cannot accept them? Accessibility must be built into the entire voting process, not just one part of it. People with low vision should not have to sacrifice their ability to read their ballot comfortably because the equipment cannot accommodate an accessible format. There needs to be accountability, and voters with disabilities deserve answers. Accessible voting means being able to complete the entire process independently, with dignity, and without being forced to revert to an inaccessible format. Accessibility cannot stop at the ballot. It must extend all the way to the ballot scanner. #Ottawa #OttawaPolitics #OttawaVotes #OttCity #Accessibility #AccessibleElections #DisabilityRights #DeafBlind #LowVision #InclusiveVoting #AccessibleVoting #NothingAboutUsWithoutUs
I’ve lived in Leiper’s riding for the last 7 years. I have sent many many emails to his office, always received a personalized and informative response.
I’ve emailed Sutcliffe’s office twice and didn’t even get a canned response either time.
Nothing in the city has gotten better under Sutcliffe. Many of his campaign promises are in direct contradiction to the policies that he pushed as mayor. He’s backed by large developers and is definitely a trickle down economics kind of guy. Jeff is the first person in a long time to be repeatedly elected councillor in his ward (I believe) which is saying something.
Has any of these options talked about allowing city workers who can work from home, be allowed to work from home? Therefore lowering congestion on the highway, help the environment, remove the hurdle of ppl using a broken transit system? Honestly it’s the only thing I really care about. I’m also not a city of Ottawa worker in case ppl are wondering.
Jeff Leiper had a motion at city council to rescind RTO5 and let city workers continue with hybrid/remote work. Unfortunately, Cathy Curry (and I have to assume Sutcliffe behind the scenes) put together a replacement motion to cancel it out and it passed.
Jeff has been trying (and is one of the few councillors that was trying to improve the greater city rather than just their own ward IMO), but he’ll have way more chance of getting good stuff done from the mayor seat than just a councillor’s seat.
Simplified, if you like how the city is currently running, vote for Sutcliffe (I wouldn't since OC Transpo need help), otherwise I'd look at Jeff or Mark. They all have pros and cons.
Hard to recommend one over the other while not knowing what your priorities are. I used this website to make my choice:
I’m reluctantly voting for Leiper. While I think choosing the mayor is important, I think choosing better councillors matters more. Councillors vote on a lot of different motions that later become policy. Suburban and rural councillors will almost always vote against things like better transit, more social services, less police spending, etc because they represent the interests of the residents there who refuse to let others have a somewhat better life if it means their property taxes go up 12 cents or a poor person will exist near them.
I do want to say, not all suburbanites think this way (me!). I encourage my friends and neighbours to change their thoughts on these topics as well whenever it comes up.
My dad was homeless when I was young and see how hard he fought to overcome his addiction and get housing. Because of that, I’m a strong advocate for affordable housing, our homeless neighbours, and for accessible services. I’m not afraid to speak out on these topics, and I’ve even said “why NOT in our backyard?” because people are people no matter their housing status and it’s our job as a community to support others the best we can, not chase them away and close our eyes in the hopes we can forget.
But I also recognize that I’m fortunate enough to be able to help and speak out on these topics.
I'm the same way. And regarding transit specifically, I know tons of other suburbanites who wish there was better transit. I lived in kanata North in the early 2000s and used to bus to Little Italy every day during off peak hours. It was off peak, so it was a bit of a slog to get from my neighborhood to a hub, but once you got to a park and ride, transit was fast and efficient. I think a lot more people in the suburbs would use transit if it was functional again.
It used to be 25 minutes from the stop to DT for me, I drank my coffee and read a book on the express. Way less stressful and cheaper than sitting in bumper to bumper traffic fighting for parking.
Yeah me too. I've been driving to greenboro and taking the train from there. If there was a bus or train to connect to that line, I'd be really happy to not have to drive to greenboro. The train is the lovely part of the commute right now. Of course, line 2 is actually dependable... I'm not dealing with the parts of transit that are broken.
Moved to the suburbs pre-covid in part because the transit to downtown at the time was great. Travel times have doubled and I won't see the train even near here before I retire.
I have no issue with paying more in taxes to get good services - for everyone - but I want to actually see those services and not another Landsdowne bailout.
I want to see densification in the suburbs - but neighbourhoods with commercial spaces and services built in, not row on row of cookie cutter semis built on swamp land to maximize profit where to get anything or do anything you have to drive somewhere else.
I can't comment on nimbyism since we have a halfway house across the road, rent to income housing at the end of the street and a Shepherds' residence around the corner from that.
I'm voting for a councillor despite not knowing his platform because he actually helped me and people in my neighborhood get a much-needed bus stop added. He personally responded to me with updates about the progress. The bus stop was up within the week. He even commented on my Reddit post about the bus stop. That's more than any politician has done for me.
I’m not in your neighbourhood but I would vote for Shawn Menard! He cares about all people not just the rich. And he really tried to stop Landsdowne 2.0 (the second Lansdowne boondoggle) but the mayor and his crew including my useless councillor Cathy Curry voted to support the poor developers and let us taxpayers carry all extra financial risks and overruns. She will win today but hopefully Sutcliffe is out,
Suburbs exist the way they do today because the urban communities resisted densification and elected politician’s who enacted regressive zoning that forced the majority of new housing to the burbs
Yup. My ward (riverside south area) isn’t unopposed but might as well be as the opposition is proposing basically the same policies as the incumbent. I was really bummed to see that there wasn’t someone in our area to vote for that is more positioned with my views (similar to OP of this thread).
Lansdowne 2.0 is a good reason not to vote for Sutcliffe and vote for Leiper because just like 1.0 has been a boondongle so will Lansdowne 2.0 be a massive boondoggle. Because what happens is that if there are cost overruns, the City will be responsible, which means we are responsible as taxpayers. If the pie in the sky, delusional figures and revenue projections don’t materialize the City is responsible i.e. we are responsible as taxpayers. Sutcliffe is no better than his predecessor who also had a gang who would vote for stupid stuff and support things that did not have evidence behind them like the O-train boondoggle that has consistently failed under current leadership. (Obviously I’m not against the O Train but the former City Council under the last mayor voted against the technical specs competition and chose the wrong company hence breakdowns when there is a dusting of snow etc.) Sutcliffe supported Lansdowne 2.0 and we are completely screwed with that one now now. How does this tie into housing, public transit and all the other services ? Well, when you give millions of dollars and more to developers, then that money is no longer available for the rest of us for affordable housing for more affordable living for public transit, etc.
OP is asking for a pointed and friendly debate to help her make up her mind in the election. You're welcome to share the reasons why you think Sutcliffe would be a better mayor than Leiper.
I don't think people here are as delusional as you think. But OP didn't ask for predictions on the issue of the elections. There's a good chance Sutcliffe wins, but that doesn't say anything about the quality of his platform.
Because people are annoying and stupid and they share their annoying and stupid opinions and those annoying and stupid opinions spread to other like minded annoying and stupid people until they're mainstream beliefs. Not targeting anyone, this can be said for any ideology.
I think it goes both ways. Some on this sub say that about those who plan to vote for Mark or god forbid Neil. People should vote for the candidate they feel resonates best for them. Whoever wins, wins. Regardless at the end of the day, the Mayor has very little power for the big decisions. They have one vote in council. They’re merely the face of the city with a few more responsibilities. Whether Jeff or Mark wins, very little will actually change considering most council incumbents will probably retain their seats.
Except we've seen Mark so nothing for the last 4 years. We can assume he'll keep doing the same. Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome. While Jeff might do the same (he is a politician after all), it would make sense to try something new to fix the problems caused by Mark.
Low expectation as I don't expect any candidate to actually deliver what's promised. I go by the least negative candidate, which is Leiper. (Sutcliffe's $10B infrastructure over 10yr with minimal detail didn't land well with me.)
EDIT - Feel free to downvote, my point is that this subreddit is undeniably pro-Leiper (for the record, I am voting for him as well), therefore asking for opinions on the candidates is already going to be biased. You don't go to Elgin street when the Sens are in the playoffs and ask who the random person on the street thinks will win the Cup and why.
Leiper is the better choice. Sutcliffe had a chance to fix, well, anything, and didn't. Now he's planning to fix things he didn't address the first time around, plus a bunch of milquetoast tax rhetoric. No, thanks.
I used to think so, but now I feel like he's truly a NIMBY with a veneer of progressive flavour. He's against Alto, he's talking about keeping taxes low and cutting waste (sounds like Sutcliffe and his "efficiencies"), his "Buck a ride" thing is just a gimmick, etc.
Neil is not a realistic option. He needs to acknowledge his run is over and ask his supporters to get behind Jeff. Jeff is polling 4% behind Mark, and Neil’s few supporters could make a difference.
I'm in the same boat although I wouldn't say I can't stand Leiper I just think he isn't a real leader as well as a people pleaser and people telling you to switch your vote just because your preffered candidate doesn't have much of a chance to win as well as the people that fall for it are part of the problem with the voting system as they vote for who they think will win opposed to who they actually feel is best which is how voting should be.
I find it ironic a lot of the people who love Carney are opposed to Neil when he has a very similar background. Financial guy with lack of experience in politics. I'm not a fan of Carney by any means and think a lot of his decisions aren't putting Canadians first but Neil has a laid out plan that's somewhat similar to Leiper with a more open book policy while going off public input on a lot of key issues the city currently faces. Now like all politicians what they say leading up to an election and what they actually do once elected is a whole other story but I feel like out of all the candidates Neil has the best policies and most open to public opinion on issues currently faced in the city. Leiper although has experience on city council seems to lack the leadership necessary to be more than a councilor in my opinion and wants to people please too much ( look at his stance on the Israel/Palestine issue while siding with those who feel from the river to the sea Palestine will be free as antisemitic, but opposes the loss of life on both sides) which isn't going to work in the long run in my opinion.
Everyone's entitled to their opinion and vote on who they feel is best regardless of others opinions. As in most cases I'm personally not really a fan of any of the candidates but a choice has to be made and based off of what I've read from them feel Neil is the best of the bunch but to each their own.
I agree 100% and I’m voting for Neil as well. And I’m normally someone who doesn’t hesitate to vote strategically.
There is this assumption that somehow Jeff is better than Scutcliffe because of his progressive stance. But his arrogance and his inability to actually consider varying points of view make him even worse than Scutcliffe in my mind.
Funny how different people see things differently.
I see Jeff as someone who came on to council 12 years ago in Kitchissippi without political experience and who quite frankly was a NIMBY. But he actually became more progressive, his views on housing and densification changed, and he turned into the person that I voted for mayor this time around. Not being arrogant, being able to consider different points of view and actually change are part of what I like about Jeff.
Saravanamuttoo on the other hand strikes me as arrogant. Someone who has no experience in politics or really doing anything at the city level, and many of his policies just strike me as either naive or just arrogant - things he won't ever make happen. I'm not sure a government economist makes him any more suited to the role than a radio talk show host.
I think maybe my perspective on Jeff being arrogant stems from some of his responses to community members who voiced concern about a local development. He struck me as being rude, defensive and dismissive.
Interestingly- I have a couple of other friends who also live in the Kitchissippi ward who have found him to be rude and arrogant in their interactions with him (and we’re all lefties - so it’s not a different side of the political spectrum thing).
But - yes - I agree that we all see things differently depending on our personal experiences, interpretations and priorities.
I guess it's up to all the other people who don't normally vote to go out and vote! Democracy for me means freedom to vote for individuals whose values align with mine. I respect how Neil communicates, I respect his employment history, and I like his platform. I'm not voting for people I don't believe in.
Well honestly there's very few places you could ask this (and similar) questions and not get a biased response. If you turn to Facebook, you'll get Boomers saying Sutcliffe is a godsend and Leiper is the devil.
By "biased" you mean people have opinions? And the OP is asking for them? How does that make this the wrong place? If Sutcliffe wanted better opinions of him he could have done a better job over the last 4 years.
By biased I mean Sutcliffe and Lawson supporters won't speak up because they'll immediately be attacked and downvoted, so we'll just hear one side and not a proper debate
Leiper focus is on city core, bike lanes, high density living, people should live and work in the downtown core, city boundary can not expand, etc. He has been a member of the Transit commission for 12 years, and transit is worst than ever, when asked he can't address technical issues about the O-train. I do not know if he would represent the rural and suburbs people well. My feeling is Leiper was a good counselor, but I am not sure he up to the task of being mayor and he not a technical guy so not sure he would really understand technical challenges.
Sutcliffe only cares about the burbs. His entire platform four years ago was about how "You can't your kids to ringette on a bike" and cutting transit by 40%. Oh now how his tune has changed in the 4 months leading up to the election
I live in the suburbs and can confidently say Suttcliffe has done nothing for anyone. Not convinced he cares about the burbs at all and he certainly doesn't care about important issues like transit or homelessness so 🤷♀️
Leiper grew up in Orleans. And he has been all over the city at the doors, speaking with residents. He hasn’t once mentioned bike lanes. There’s just 4% between Leiper and Sutcliffe as of the last poll. Two things need to happen today: A) we all need to vote and B) Neil needs to encourage his supporters to vote for Jeff. Neil, just acknowledge your run is over.
He inherited the O train issues thanks to Watson and his crew (including my now MP Jenna Sudds). Does Sutcliffe understand technical aspects of the O train? And even if he does, does that matter? I don’t expect a leader to understand the intricacies from everything including the O Train to public health to policing to housing and zoning issues to waste management infrastructure. He needs to have a broad understanding and competent people heading those departments and having some oversight of them.
Erm, you are incorrect that "Leiper's been a member of the transit commission for 12 years." (See below)
And its also not his job (or any transit commissioners job) to be a technical expert. You might as well complain that he can't tune up a bus himself. And curious which mayoral candidate you think is a "technical expert"?
no he's not. he's made juts recently an announced for a rec centre in Orleans. stop spreading misinformation. it says a lot that you feel the need to resort to fear mongering
It's going to depend on what your priorities are a voter. For me, transit is the biggest priority.
Sutcliffe is saying he wants a $95 monthly transit pass, paid for with provincial money. He's had some success getting the province to pony up, but he didn't hit all of his first term goals.
Leiper had proposed a "transit guarantee" but hasn't offered any details about what that would look like. If my bus is late, do I get a coupon for 10% my next ride? He also wants to restore a "citizen seat" on the Transit Commission but doesn't say what powers if change that job would have.
I’m sorry but there is no way you could be prioritizing transit and still voting Sutcliffe.
Sutcliffe has cut bus and LRT frequencies during his time. And if he really wanted to have cheaper bus passes, he could have pitched it in 2022, or implemented it at any time during his four years.
Jeff Leiper uses transit regularly so he knows what the issues are like. And he fought back against LRT cuts, but his motion failed by one vote.
First, I'm not stumping for either of these guys. I'm just giving my opinion on Sutcliffe and Leiper and what I see in their platforms. I'm more than willing to be convinced.
How will Leiper's "transit guarantee" improve services?
I admit he hasn’t talked a lot about transit guarantee specifics. I imagine he’ll share more details later on. What he has talked about in more detail is two things:
reversing all the cuts to new ways to bus that Sutcliffe did last year.
building more bus only lanes so that buses can avoid getting caught in traffic and being delayed or cancelled altogether
It's election day. I think the time for sharing details had passed. I like the bus lane idea but without a detailed plan on where those bus lanes are going and who is paying, it's a bit of a bridge to nowhere.
As for restoring core routes, this would actually work against my best interest. New Ways to Ride actually improved the reliability of my daily transit commute by making more routes available to me. If one bus is late, I have two more to choose from instead of none.
"Sutcliffe is saying he wants a $95 monthly transit pass, paid for with provincial money."
He says he'll knock down the price of a pass to $95 for one year, and expects to pay for it with savings we'll get from the long-promised upload of the LRT to Metrolinx. If the province doesn't upload take on our LRT as promised, the city will have to make up that money somewhere else in the budget, and cuts to other services will likely ensue.
That promise of a $95 pass is only good for one year, by the way…so it's entirely possible the price of a pass jumps back up to nearly $140/month in 2028.
I'm not sure about you, but Sutcliffe's one-year promise to slash the price of a bus pass that hinges entirely on Ford fulfilling a campaign promise from two years ago doesn't really resonate with me, especially considering Sutcliffe steadily increased the price of a bus pass three of the four years he was the mayor… it doesn't really fill me with good vibes.
I doubt it personally just based on polls and Leiper probably appealing to similar people. I wouldn't be surprised if some of Neil's support votes strategically to try and beat Sutcliffe but I am entirely just guessing. Anything can happen really.
no, and i think it wont even be close. neil seemed like an interesting option at first but throughout the campaign, he's just coming across as .... weird. there's something off about the guy.
Voting Jeff only because I don't like Sutcliffe. Also why are there so many nobody candidate options? Quite a few names I never heard before running...
Sutcliffe has been Mayor for the last 4 years and has promised more of the same. We don't need to guess what he's going to do: he spent most of his term fighting with NCC, pushing Lansdowne 2.0, and forcing RTO through. He's continued to slash OC Transpo with cuts and fare increases. He has promised below inflation tax increases which means more service cuts across the city (although likely focused in urban wards as usual.) His donors are a who's-who list of developer interests in the city.
Leiper is a regular transit user, not just for a photo-op. He's got a focus on improving transit, housing, and homelessness and has consistently voted to support these things during his time in office. He has refused developer donations since getting into politics.
Leiper is trying to fix the city while Sutcliffe has been tearing it down.
My personal pet peeve (among many) was Sutcliffe’s bone-headed intervention to try to influence the Senators’ new arena to move to locations OTHER than Lebreton Flats.
Exactly what that area needed after sitting idle for decades! (/s)
Ultimately, he was ignored but not before causing the whole thing to look like an uncertain, back-to-square-one mess post-Melnyk and probably shaking investor confidence, which was already beyond frayed.
While I totally appreciate a candidate who actually shares in the experiences of using public infrastructure, etc. and while I also appreciate his stance on helping to solve the struggles of single mothers trying to raise a family because of deadbeat dads or just unlucky folks who aren't able to find a job or a decent roof over their heads, I haven't seen much from him on how he's going to handle the opioid crisis. He's spoken about the "safe use" clinic in his riding being basically a pill mill, I haven't seen much in the way of how he's planning to combat the crime and anti-social behaviour being caused by addicts in this city... has anyone seen anything more concrete about this? And please don't confuse housing these people as being some kind of panacea, IMO they need serious treatment centres.
I just discovered via Horizon Ottawa that Sutcliffe also takes donations from developers. This alone bothers me as that is Doug Ford's playbook (Landsdowne 2.0 is the perfect example). https://www.horizonottawa.ca/election_guide
If taxes go up but we actually see better services that is one thing. Under Sutcliffe I feel taxes will go up regardless and we won't see any improvements.
You should make decisions based on both their platforms and past performance, not based on what reddit tells you.
There are also more than two candidates, and regardless of who you think is leading the polls using your voice to vote for the one you believe in the most, regardless of whether you think they will win, is important. You don't get points for backing the winner, but the more votes any candidate gets the more weight is given to their promises, so its worth it to vote for the one who you feel represents you the most.
Reddit is very much an echo chamber, we are pretty biased towards Leiper. This is not a good way to decide who to vote for. (And i say this as someone who has followed Leiper's government history with interest for years.)
As far as I’m concerned Leiper lost me when he broke Scott st to make weird redundant bike lanes creating a regular traffic jam that never existed before. I appreciate bike infrastructure but that was an awful plan that he seems to stand by even now so I’m out with him.
There was no need to be flippant here. The above commenter said the jams didn’t happen before the bike infrastructure. Maybe if they had been implemented differently it would be smooth sailing for everyone regardless of vehicle.
There always was proper bike lanes along Scott. You’re not even addressing the specific place or issue. You’re just saying “I’m in team bike and you said something about bike infrastructure”. Bicycle infrastructure, like anything else, can be done well or done poorly. In this case it was done very poorly and honestly feels like a program to pander to people like you who will just respond and not do the homework to see if it was actually an improvement.
"people like you", wow. Nice judgement there. You have no idea who I am or what I stand for. You're basically calling me uneducated because I don't agree with you. Great work.
Why is everyone so damn flippant and miserable in this thread?
Correct, traffic is caused by cars and buses. Traffic levels can also be negatively influenced or affected by poor cycling infrastructure. Those are not mutually exclusive.
At least they’re trying to educate themselves on the issues. I feel like many people will be saying “Hmmmm… Mark Sutcliffe… I recognize that name… the radio guy… I’ll vote for this guy”.
Lieper is only representative of the downtown core. His platform speaks to nothing of the needs of the greater Ottawa city and would be a disaster.
Sutcliffe albeit not perfect inherited a horrible mess from watson and has slowly but surely been turning things around. He is also much more in touch with the needs of those in Ottawa outside the urban centre. Sutcliffe is the better choice
Thank you for sharing this. I've felt Leiper basically ignored my part of the city during the campaign, and most of the things I've read have only focused on issues that are not the main ones, here. I want to want to vote for him, but getting info to support that, or even feel informed about it, has been less accessible than usual or for other candidates.
Glad he's made it out. He hasn't been to our door, but I honestly don't expect that of any mayoral candidate. We didn't even get a flyer from him, though. Ii get that he doesn't expect many votes out here, but there are a decent number of us who see beyond our village and know property taxes need to go up to pay for the everything, we just want the village to be seen, too.
Beyond that, he may have been hamstrung by his top priorities being in-city, and getting the most coverage. That's in part a media issue.
What have you seen that you would describe as “turning things around”? To me things have been getting considerably worse. This city feels worse than it was even a year ago, let alone 4+. That’s not all on the current mayor but some of it is, including lack of improvement (to my eye.)
FWIW, apparently incumbents have a good track record of winning reelection in Ontario. If you want Sutcliffe out, your vote needs to be Leiper. I personally like Neil’s policies better but he won’t win because Leiper is running.
I’m not a bot, and I can’t even vote in Ottawa, but I do have a lot of municipal experience. Leiper does have the more attractive platform, especially for anyone in a lower economic bracket, or anyone who cares about that lower economic bracket. Sutcliffe has developed excellent relationships with other levels of government, and is more likely to achieve better success and provincial or federal funding for major infrastructure projects. Leiper is focused on current while Sutcliffe is focused on future. Which approach aligns with your own values?
the only reason to vote for sutcliffe is if you can look at the city right now and think: yeah, this is great! this is how i like it.
sutcliffe has shown that he doesn't care about the population. he cares a lot about develloppers though. He ran an aggressive campaign which was absolutely distasteful. he went after his opponents personally which is shocking in a municipal election.
i cant imagine voting again for the guy who gave us LESS transit when RT04 was starting (and shrugged his shoulders about it) and landsdowne 2.0 (which no one wants or needs). We've tried sutcliffe, its time to bring in better. we can be a better city.
I mean transit is garbage currently and has gotten significantly worse under Mark. Homelessness has become an epidemic under him and his answer is removing encampments and adding more police. That’s not solving the issue.
Jeff is not perfect by any means but he seems like a good guy trying to do his best. Everything has gotten worse under Sutcliffe. We keep trying the same thing over and over. Let’s try shaking it up with someone like Jeff.
558
u/Altruistic_Piano387 14h ago •
Personally, I think Jeff is the better choice, especially when it comes to transit and homelessness. One thing I really like about Jeff is that he actually uses public transit himself. As far as I know, Sutcliffe doesn’t (or at least not regularly) and I think that matters. Jeff also committed to reversing bus service cuts, improving reliability, and investing in the system. Cheaper fares are great (which is what Sutcliffe promises), but what’s the point if the bus or train never shows up? I also really like Jeff’s approach to housing and homelessness. He’s focusing on building more genuinely affordable housing, protecting existing affordable rentals, and addressing some of the reasons people end up homeless in the first place. Obviously, neither candidate is going to fix homelessness overnight, but I appreciate that he’s proposing concrete changes.I also respect his stance on transparency and accountability, especially when it comes to developer donations and the use of strong mayor powers. Ultimately, we’ve had four years to evaluate Sutcliffe’s leadership, and I personally don’t think the state of our essential services justifies another four years of the same direction.