Deposit rule limits field
Re: New rules for byelection ‘to ensure candidates serious’, July 31.
So, the city clerk thinks it’s a good idea that candidates running for council have their nomination supported by at least 10 people and pay a $100 nomination deposit, the latter idea Coun. Grant Meyer thinks should become non-refundable in the future.
I have no issue with finding at least 10 people to support your nomination, because if you can’t drum up that much support for your nomination, how are you going to drum up enough votes to win the nomination?
However, those 10 supporters should be carefully vetted to make sure they are not simply representative of 10 different developers and their corporate backers.
Following this, I take huge issue with the $100 deposit. This sends the wrong message that democracy is somehow for sale. (Editor’s note: the deposit is to be refunded upon filing of the candidate’s financial disclosure statement.) There are responsible, engaged citizens in the community, who would make excellent councillors, for whom coming up with an extra $100 nomination deposit would be very difficult.
Yes, folks, there are poor people in White Rock. And, contrary to popular belief, not all poor people are deadbeats, druggies, criminals and losers.
Persons with disabilities, persons on fixed incomes, working families, single parents... all of these groups often fall under the poverty line, and not through any fault of their own.
You can bet your bottom dollar, that whoever wins the byelection in November will be the person most backed by developers and the various corporate groups who support them.
White Rock city council is already heavily pro-development. Is this the future of White Rock? Can a seat on council literally be bought and paid for?
Shawna Brown, Surrey