Re: Battle for the mayor’s chair, Nov. 3.
I am wondering if the term “battle” is appropriate for incumbent candidate Dianne Watts in Surrey’s upcoming election for mayor.
By coincidence, together with my copy of the Peace Arch News, I also received the Elections 2011 Voter’s Guide Booklet, with short bios of candidates for mayor, councillors and school trustees.
After reading the PAN article featuring the platforms of the candidates for mayor, I read their bios in the guide.
I would firstly offer them my compliments for having the interest and desire to serve Surrey; activism is a critical component of a healthy community. However, they do need to bring some in-depth and relevant experience to the table.
Altruism alone is not acceptable. Only two of the six candidates have even remotely applicable public or business service experience. Others – with backgrounds of being a realtor, “a rebel with cause,” a working artist, another with just a stated “vision” – expect us to believe they have the qualifications to lead a city of almost half a million residents and manage $300 million in annual revenue.
I am sorry, but it is almost an insult to the magnitude of the job that they would consider themselves adequate to even hold the coattails of Watts, and I shudder at the eventual prospect of her retirement if our choice to replace her would be from such a crop of candidates.
Would any of them have the nerve to apply for the job of CEO with a similarly large corporation? How is it that the top job attracts completely unqualified people while the candidates for council and school trustee are brimming with relevant and credible background?
Are they just more realistic?
George Zador, Surrey
• • •
Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts has fudged her resumé by saying she lives in Cloverdale when she doesn’t.
Why is it a problem when other public officials fudge their resumés but not the mayor?
And while the mayor has little formal education to put on her resume, it is still a subject of interest for the electorate.
Watts is silent on what the city paid for her Economic Summit, on how much speaker George W. Bush was paid, on why she doesn’t back up building inspectors on building-code violations, on why she turns a blind eye to city bylaws generally, on what she does for her generous developer and firefighter friends after each election, on why one-third of her handsome salary is tax free, and on what the real price of the new city hall will be.
The Surrey election could be exciting. It is just missing the issues.
Jim McMurtry, Surrey
• • •
I find you are continuously praising Surrey Mayor Dianne Watts in every single issue of the Peace Arch News.
It is quite apparent that you do not report facts – but try and influence voters’ opinions.
This is not fair and correct.
You do not give the other candidates a chance to portray themselves. What you are doing is poor business etiquette.
It will reflect on your paper.
I. Thielemann, Surrey