Dean Brawn

Survey Responses:


Question 1.1:

Do you think municipal taxes should:

a) Reduce in absolute terms
b) Reduce in real terms (grow, but slower than inflation)
c) Reduce in relative terms (grow, but slower than inflation plus population growth)
d) Stay the same (grow, but only in line with inflation plus population growth)
e) Increase a bit (grow in line with the city’s Municipal Price Index)
f) Increase more (grow faster than the city’s Municipal Price Index)

 

Answer 1.1 [Choose One]:

a) Reduce in absolute terms


Question 1.2:

Comments?

 

Answer/Comments 1.2:

If we start rewarding success rather than penalizing it with higher taxes, we should be able to start bringing new businesses back to our great city to fill empty spaces and employ more people.


Question 2.1:

Would you vote in favour of allocating any tax dollars or giving any subsidy towards a new stadium/arena?

 

Answer 2.1 [Yes/No Only]:

Yes.


Question 2.2:

If yes, how much and in what form would these taxes take (direct cash, land, subsidy, indirect, etc), and why do you support public dollars being directed towards a corporation?

 

Answer/Comments 2.2:

Ask cities like Winnipeg and Quebec City what the value of having an NHL team in their city is in real terms. Both cities ended up spending money to build or upgrade their own event/cultural centre without any financial input from an anchor tenant to try and attract a team back. Only one was successful so far. PLUS, whenever a concert goes to Edmonton and doesn’t come here, there’s roughly half-a-million dollars that leaves our economy and enters Edmonton’s. Also, the Flames organization generates hundreds of thousands of dollars every September at their annual Charity Golf Tournament, not to mention the charitable contribution of (ballpark) $50,000 every home game through their 50-50 draws (45-60, depending on how they do in the playoffs), nor the countless other charitable contributions they make to our community every year. Finally, how many people are employed directly and indirectly because of the activity of the Flames.


Question 3.1:

Recent research on Calgary’s City Council found that council spends nearly a quarter of its’ time meeting in private (in camera). Do you agree that this is too much time spent in private?

 

Answer 3.1 [Yes/No Only]:

Yes.


Question 3.2:

If so, what would you do to fix this? Which topics do you believe should be discussed behind closed doors and why?

 

Answer/Comments 3.2:

If Council has set clear and concise policy, creating level playing fields for the citizens of Calgary, there should not be a need to go in camera anywhere near as much as they have. If decisions are made in the open, there is no perception of inappropriate or politically motivated decisions or approvals.


Question 4.1:

From the $470,000 Blue Ring, to the $236,000 for a “Poop Palace”, and now another $500,000 for Bowfort Towers, council has consistently failed to engage with Calgarians about which public Art projects their tax dollars are spent on. Do you support continuing to use taxpayer dollars to fund art projects for the city?

 

Answer 4.1 [Yes/No Only]:

Yes. 


Question 4.2:

If yes, why do you think council and administration have repeatedly failed on this issue, and what guidelines should be used to ensure Calgarians are happy with the results in future?

 

Answer/Comments 4.2:

We need to put an end to the current wasteful and hideous public art that is approved in our city; HOWEVER, the community should have a far stronger voice in what it is, what it costs, and where it should be placed. A world class city needs to have accessible public art. A total overhaul of the process needs to be done. We have a world class art college in our back yard, actually in Ward 7, in ACAD, let’s use it. I don’t believe those who say we can’t cut public art spending, we absolutely can and we must. Let’s move to a model that uses more private dollars for public art to take the tax payer off the hook. The truth of the matter is that if we help business succeed in our city, private investors will step up to support public art projects so that the city can concentrate on more pressing public needs.


Question 5:

How can council support small businesses?

 

Answer 5:

The CFIB has proposed three well thought out ideas to help us promote and assist business success. After all, small business employs nearly 80% of us so we need to help them succeed, help new businesses start up and other businesses move here!


Question 6.1:

Do you support the current plan for construction of the Green Line?

 

Answer 6.1 [Yes/No Only]:

Yes.


Question 6.2:

The construction of the Green Line was approved based on a cost-benefit analysis that assumed the project would be completed two years earlier than now projected, and at a lower construction cost for the entire line than is now estimated for half of the line. If the costs increase again or the project is further delayed, would you continue to support it, and why?

 

Answer/Comment 6.2:

If the cost benefit analysis continues to make sense, and if there are no tax increases, I will continue to support it.


Question 7.1:

In July, City Council voted against a motion to hold a referendum/plebiscite on whether Calgary should bid to host the 2026 Winter Olympics bid. Do you support holding a referendum / plebiscite on whether Calgary should bid to host the 2026 Winter Olympics bid?

 

Answer 7.1 [Yes/No Only]:

Yes.


Question 7.2:

Why do you support/oppose a public vote? Should the results of a vote should be binding?

 

Answer/Comment 7.2:

In 1988, Calgary rethought how the Olympics were funded and managed to do what so many others haven’t been able to do – Create an ongoing legacy that is actually self-funded! Right now, the IOC puts all the risk on the host city without much of the reward on the successful side. It is worth looking at to see if Calgary can change the model yet again to convince the IOC to share on both the risk & reward. We’re an entrepreneurial city and if City Council stops the ongoing adversarial approach to business and opportunities for success, we can get back there again.