Hamilton’s Mayoral Race Begins
Former mayor Fred Eisenberger plans to run for mayor of Hamilton next year.
“Barring the unforeseen … I’m going to be a candidate in 2014,” Eisenberger said in a telephone interview Tuesday.
Eisenberger, who was mayor from 2006 to 2010, has been mulling over a comeback attempt for months.
His decision comes fast on the heels of Ward I Councillor Brian McHattie’s commitment to go after the mayor’s chair.
They’ll both face off against Bob Bratina, who unseated Eisenberger in 2010.
Though Bratina hasn’t formally thrown his hat in the ring, there’s no question he intends to seek a second term.
He made that clear again when asked about his mayoral plans after his recent resignation from the police board.
“I have no intention of not seeking re-election, but I’m not making any announcements until the time is for nominations to be announced,” Bratina told a media scrum.
That leaves Ancaster Councillor Lloyd Ferguson, another potential big-gun candidate, still holding fire about his plans.
Ferguson has also been considering going after the mayor’s job for months. But with the election a full year away, he says there’s plenty of time for a decision.
“I’m still pondering it,” he says, noting he still very much enjoys his current job.
Eisenberger’s candidacy makes things a little awkward for McHattie in more ways than one.
Not only did McHattie endorse Eisenberger’s 2010 re-election bid, but Ward 1, McHattie’s home turf, was the only ward Eisenberger — who placed third behind Bratina and second-placer former mayor Larry Di Ianni — carried outright.
In addition, both men occupy pretty much the same centre-left space on the political spectrum, thus creating the possibility of vote splitting. (Continued: Andrew Dreschel, Hamilton Spectator) http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4134544-dreschel-eisenberger-enters-the-race-for-top-job/
I don’t understand what your editorial cartoon was about. Again I’ve asked friends what was that cartoon about? It appears that you expect me to have a pre-conceived idea about a program that I never watched. (breaking bad) I get Brian’s, I don’t get Eisenberger, and I don’t get the Bill Kelly picture. Does an editorial cartoon work if you have to explain it?
Dear Ms. Shacklock,
Thank you for your email.
Please consider the subject matter: Hamilton municipal politics. It can be very eye glazing stuff and none of the three candidates are what I feel to be the most lively individuals to depict. It’s very early days, and nothing in the form of substance has been brought to the Mayoral race beyond intentions to run, but the unofficial kickoff, in my opinion, is significant to mark the occasion with a cartoon.
Brian McHattie is my city councillor, and he’s been a good one. But Mayor? I don’t know.
You are correct, the Heisenburger piece is a pop cultural reference to the critically acclaimed drama that wrapped up this week called “Breaking Bad”. It’s been running since 2008. I drew this knowing many, I understand yourself included, wouldn’t get it without being aware of the series and the main character called Heisenberg. Forgive my indulgence for being a huge fan of the extraordinary series, but I found it to be a natural fit for the re-emergence of Fred Eisenberger on the political scene, many have informed me they got quite the chuckle from it, and I had fun drawing the ex-Mayor portrayed as such.
The final frame simply refers to the fact that the Mayor really only uses the Bill Kelly Show to get his talking point messages out to the public.
I don’t expect everyone to understand or appreciate my cartoons or what can be described as a sense of humour. It’s an impossible task to achieve. Even to my loyal fans any given cartoon might be a homerun or a complete dud. I think this applies to anyone working in any field – ones work simply can’t be all good things to all people.
Re: Editorial cartoon, Jan. 18
I liked Graeme MacKay’s cartoon depicting Hamilton’s Mayor and the building inspection team and the reference to Haiti. There are many places in Hamilton that look earthquake damaged.
Too, MacKay could have done better had he shown an empty chair for an inspector off work on stress leave.
Re: Editorial cartoon, Jan. 18 If there is a relief organization out there that can use my “expertise” for relief efforts in Haiti, I will gladly go to try to help. Perhaps cartoonist MacKay will help fund the costs.
City of Hamilton building inspector
Nice cartoon today! I howled.
Matt Jelly on Facebook
Hamilton’s Mayor Fred Eisenberger and Canada’s Liberal leader Stephane Dion seem to be leading rather parallel lives — at least they have in my strange and warped mind. Both guys, in their mid fifties, defied the odds and were narrowly voted into their current positions of power at around the same time in the Fall of 2006. Everyone knows of Dion’s penchant for all things environmental, but it was a leftie grassroot movement that boosted Eisenberger, the once Conservative candidate of elections past to embrace green things and defeat the pro-development incumbant Larry diIanni. Since assuming their roles of leadership both Eisenberger and Dion have had a great deal of difficulty projecting qualities that leaders need in order to lead. At this point, both seem to be out of their leagues, more suited for bureaucratic jobs as opposed to public positions. Both seem to have expiry dates that’ll see them out of the scene after their respective upcoming election races.syndication purposes this was more than ideal to take a local concept and turn it into a national one. — Oh, and don’t forget to vote for my cartoon.
Don’t let the decision makers of Hamilton destroy one of the few architectual icons in the city. In the past I haven’t been so kind to our poor City Hall, as this 1998 editorial cartoon illustrates. But over the past few years I’ve learned to appreciate it better and better despite it being neglected and allowed to fall apart by negligent politicians. It needs upgrades, it needs some scrubbing, surrounding features need to be changed or renovated, but most importantly — it needs a lot more love by Hamiltonians and its politicians.
Here are my reasons for why we need to save Stan Roscoe’s City Hall:
— Hamilton can’t afford a new City Hall. This is a choice between renovating at $69 million, or rebuilding from between $115 to $150 million. The extra amount to rebuild is money the city doesn’t have — that is unless they add it on our already high property taxes which they most certainly will do.
— We’ve been down this road before. City Council voted to go with renovations beginning in 2005. Work has already begun and contracts have been made to continue what was decided upon several years ago. There are more important issues to deal with.
— It was designated as a heritage building on May 9, 2005. That means most, but not all, of the buildings’ heritage features will be maintained during a costly renovation. Any decision by council to demolish the building is going to be met with litigation.
— The elected politicians of Hamilton never received a mandate by voters to tear down City Hall as it was never raised as an issue in the last election. While it might sound hokey, a City Hall is more than just an ediface, it is like a legislature, or a Parliament, or an icon that belongs to the people, not by the politicians who work there on a day to day basis.
— The replacement will be an on-the-cheap, unstylish monster. Ask yourself this: has there been any civic building constructed in this city over the last 25 years which really stands out as an attractive architectural marvel? Is the 21st century style of the new Federal Building or the Juravinski Addition any better than the 1950’s International meets modernist Style of our current City Hall? Have a look at this website to see some of the monsters built in Hamilton over the past 50 years.
— As a further point to make on a rebuilt City Hall one really has to wonder if such a new structure is going to stimulate development and people friendliness around the building as Mayor Eisenberger suggests. That’s highly doubtful given the 5 lane Main Street highway directly in front of City Hall. The only way pedestrian traffic will increase is if the city commits itself to radically altering the flow of vehicular traffic in the area, and that simply isn’t going to happen in a place like Hamilton.
— Is it really in our best interests to demolish a building and fill a landfill up with the refuse at a time when we’ve been talking about saving the planet and doing our part to reduce, reuse, and recycle? It seems pretty irresponsible to do such a thing with a building that was intended to last several lifetimes, not just a 47 year span.
Admittedly, the building ain’t a pretty sight these days. The white marble is blackened, the grey forecourt looks horrendously shabby and the council chambers above the entrance has the appearance of a frat house thanks to interior renovations which ignore how it appears on the outside. Do the necessary restoration to return the once handsome building to what it once was. And finally, never let what represents the heart of this city whither away to resemble an embarassing dump.
I think it’s possible for private investment to mix with public dollars to build a shiny new City Hall that we can all be proud of and not have to be taxed to the gills on. No matter how much they spruce up the present City Hall it’ll always look boxy, drab, and out of date. There are some really great new city halls in Ontario, eg. Kitchener’s city hall.
T.A. Trocker (May 14, 2007)