LRT ridership numbers

I have been looking forwards and backwards to figure out how the ridership numbers were developed for the LRT concept for this region.

First of they are saying in their report that 5.4 million trips are taken on the route of the LRT now.   I am not sure how that number can be correct as this would represent 21.4% of all bus trips in the region.   In find this number curious as I can not reconcile it with actual traffic numbers.

The top three bus routes are #14, #6 and #26/28 - these three routes carry around one third of all the passengers in this region.  

If we take all the people using the #30/31, #50, #51, #60, #70 and #75, we get to 23%.  But in a business as usual case, the #51, #70 and #75 would not be counted as they would not be altered to go along the LRT line.   This drops the the business as usual numbers to about 16% of the regional traffic or about 4,000,000 passengers, not the 5,400,000 they are claiming.  

They are suggesting if nothing is done there will be a 33% increase in bus traffic.

I look than at bus rapid transit and they claim this will carry 6,500,000 a year as of 2015.   This is 40% increase on the current traffic.   Even if we one re-routes all the peninsula traffic and makes Westshore students going to UVic use the BRT, they are still suggesting a dramatic increase in ridership as soon as it starts.

Then we get to the LRT ridership numbers.   They are projecting that the LRT will have 7 million passengers on a route that currently has 4 million passengers and even with everything routed onto the LRT, the total current load could not be boosted over 5.5 million.   Where will these 1.5 million trips come from?   Who are they?

1.5 million passenger trips is 750,000 round trips or 3500 daily commuters.   To give you an idea what that means, that would mean 115% the number of people that currently use the #50 bus.  

They then project that the LRT will almost double their ridership in 22 years.   That is a further 14,000 daily commuters.   This seems to run counter to their work in the report that indicates the growth in trips in the region will be firstly within the core, second within the Westshore and a distant third is traffic between the Westshore and the core.

I can find no evidence of why they think that the LRT will attract more passengers than BRT, even tough it is not faster and is less flexible.  I also do not know how they can assume that the LRT will any dramatic number of passengers over the status quo.   Where is the work to back this up?

Using examples from around the US and Canada, and correcting for what seem to errors in the report, as far as I can tell, the ridership of the LRT on opening day will be about 5,500,000 passenger trips per year, 1,500,000 fewer than they suggest.   I can not find an example of a system that would indicate that my assumptions are wrong.

I base my numbers of growth between now and 2016, preference of rail to bus, the total passenger volume on routes #30/31, #50, #51, #60, #70 and #75, losses due to longer trips because of transfers, and changes to working patterns.   Doing this I get to 5,500,000.   The loss of passengers due to transfers and changing work patterns will easily outstrip the natural growth in transit use in the next five years.   There is no strong correlation in the data to indicate that rail service will sttract more people than buses.   The data in the US and Europe gives us no clear picture.  In that case it is safest to assume that there is no marked increase in use because of the change in mode.

I am not going to project out to 2038 what the ridership numbers will be because I have no idea what will be happening for workplaces, we could have 20-30% of people working at home, vehicle technology, electric cars could be dramatically cheaper to operate per hour than conventional cars in 2038.   We do not know if we will have a dramatic change in settlement patterns as well.   We really do not know what the future of transit demand will look like.   When we look out further than 2038, it does not take long before the population stops growing.

Projecting travel times and ridership in 2038 is honestly rather misleading because there is no way to substantiate the numbers.  

The ridership numbers are all highly suspect.

Peninsula Coop Election

Voting has started for the board of directors of the Peninsula Coop.   It is once again a very fractured race with a slate of six incumbents candidates and the opposition Co-op Action Network.    The election this time includes electing directors to a three year term and a one year term as the 2009 election results were overturned.

Running for a Three Year Term - Three to be Elected

• Alicia Cormier - Co-op Action Network
• Gordon Denford - Endorsed by nominating committee - Incumbent
• Mel Hernblad - Endorsed by nominating committee - Incumbent
• Patti Hunter - Endorsed by nominating committee - Incumbent
• Cathy McIntyre - Endorsed by nominating committee
• Bejay Mills - Co-op Action Network
• Jeanette Sheehy - Co-op Action Network

Running for a One Year Term - Three to be Elected

• Bruce Clow - Endorsed by nominating committee
• Mike Fecteau - Endorsed by nominating committee - Incumbent
• Ron Gaudet - Endorsed by nominating committee - Incumbent and current President
• Greg Lyon - Co-op Action Network
• Cathie Ounsted - Endorsed by nominating committee - Incumbent
• Mike Romaine - Endorsed by nominating committee
• Ralph Sketchley - Co-op Action Network

The nominating committee endorsed nine candidates for six positions, so not all the ones endorsed by the nominating committee will be elected.   The role of the nominating committee is to assess the candidates and make recommendations on which of the candidates they committee thinks have the skill set to be on the board of directors.

I am not surprised that none of the Co-op Action Network candidates were endorsed.

In the last couple of elections the results have been about 75% for the establishment and 25% for the opposition.   Voter turn out is a pathetically low.   Only about 1-2% of Peninsula Coop members vote in the elections.   I suspect many of the people that will vote are staff of the Coop.

How will I vote?   I have no idea, I am less than impressed with the sitting board, but opposition leave me with no faith that they have an interest in running the Coop for the benefit of the members.   Their campaign feels like an ideological campaign without any consideration of the economic realities of the business.

I may vote for Cathie McIntrye, Bruce Clow and Mike Romaine for the board.   Two of the are not part of either side but all three have been vetted by the nominating committee and found to have the skills needed to be effective members of the board.

Below is an email I got from the Co-op Action Network
_________________________________________________

Voting started on Wednesday and it’s time to elect a new Board at Peninsula Co-op!


With your vote, we can create a more innovative Co-op that provides even better returns to its members with new services, democratic accountability, greater community investment and increased support for local farms and local food.


We need a new board who will offer:


Good governance and improved membership engagement
Greater support of local food and farmers
New ideas that will further the social and economic development of our region
A new grocery model, one that serves all members in Southern Vancouver Island


The following candidates are running independently and are endorsed by the Co-op Action Network:


Jeanette Sheehy - 3 year term
Alicia Cormier - 3 year term
Bejay Mills - 3 year term
Mike Romaine - 1 year term
Greg Lyon - 1 year term
Bruce Clow - 1 year term


Sadly, due to a technicality with his nomination form Jack Thronburg has been disqualified from running this year.


Voting
This year only cardholders may vote and you must bring photo ID with you when you pick up your ballot. Any questions about proxy votes should be directed to the Co-op 250-652-1188.


Voting takes place between May 25th to June 8th 10 am – 6pm at the following Co-op locations:
Food Store - 2132 Keating X Rd.
Brentwood Gas Centre - 6739 West Saanich Rd.
Pat Bay Gas Centre - 6429 Pat Bay Hwy.
Wilkinson Gas Centre - 4140 Wilkinson Rd.
Royal Oak Gas Centre - 4472 West Saanich Rd.
Goldstream Gas Centre - 894 Goldstream Ave.
Millstream Gas Centre - 2320 Millstream Ave.
Mill Bay Gas Centre - 805 Deloume Rd.
Duncan Gas Centre - 1007 Canada Ave.
Cardlock/Home Heating office - 6764 Oldfield Rd.


How to help the campaign to elect these candidates:


1) Vote for these six candidates
2) Tell everyone you know to vote for these six people
3) Volunteer an hour or two of your time this week and next– it’s fun and flexible (call Jeanette at 250-514-0428)
4) Distribute this notice far and wide (online and printed version) to your network!


Thank you for your support!
Jeanette
Co-op Action Network

What radio stations we listen to

I came across this online at Puget Sound Radio.  I worked in radio for a bit in the late 1980s so I am always interested to know what people are listening to.  

Not all the stations in Victoria take part in this.   CFUV at UVic, the Village, and CILS the francophone community radio station are not part of the ratings.   CBC Radio 2, CBC Espace, and Radio Canada all have transmitters in this region, are also not part of the survey.  Based on what I know the numbers are like, the listenership of these six stations in this region is likely less than 5% combined.  Most of that will be CBC Radio 2.

Source: BBM Canada
Demographics: Over age 12
Timeblock: Monday-Sunday 5am-1am
            Spr'11 Fall'10 Spr'10
Station      %        %      %  
CBC Radio 1 13.4   12.5    12.6 
The Ocean   11.6    8.8     9.5 
CFAX        11.2   13.4    12.3 
The Q       10.2    8.3     8.9 
KOOL FM      9.7   11.6     8.3 
The Zone     6.3    4.6     4.5 
Jack FM      4.5    4.1     5.8 
Talk        24.6   25.9    24.9
Music       42.3   37.4    37.0

I have to say I am surprised at the results.   I would never have thought that the Ocean would power ahead into second place.   I really do not get the Ocean, but then I am not a woman aged 40-65.  

Talk radio seems to be holding its own in the region but meanwhile music stations have grabbed listeners back to the region.

Meanwhile Jack FM continues to suck in the ratings.   How long till there is a format change there?  I would love to see some variety on the radio scene in this city.   If I had the time and energy I would start a new community radio station in this city.

Time for Victoria and Saanich to introduce wards for local elections.

The Local Government Act allows for a municipality to create wards or electoral districts for elections to councils.   I think the time has come for Saanich and Victoria to elect the councils by neighbourhood and not at large for the whole city.

At Large Voting is the least representative electoral system out there.   It creates many problems in the process of how people get elected and provides incumbents a huge advantage.   Ultimately as a city grows in size, slates or local political parties have to come into existence and when this occurs you start to get wild swings where from election to election there is a wholesale change on council even though the vote shift is small.

In Victoria we would then have 8 councilors elected from:

1. James Bay
2. Fairfield
3. Gonzales-Rockland-South Jubilee
4. Fernwood
5. Oaklands-North Jubilee
6. Hillside Quadra
7. Downtown-Harris Green-North Park
8. Vic West-Burnside

This list is just an example and should not be seen as something craved in stone.

Victoria could chose to have 10 councilors if it would like by passing a bylaw to that effect.   If there was a desire to have more than 10 or less than 6, then that could only be done through a change to the Letters of Patent for the City.

The relevant section of the Act:
Municipal elections at large unless on a neighbourhood constituency basis
36.1 (1) Unless a bylaw under subsection (2) applies, every council member must be elected from the municipality at large.


(2) A council may, by bylaw, provide that all or some of the councillors be elected on a neighbourhood constituency basis.
(3) A bylaw under subsection (2) must establish the areas that are to be neighbourhood constituencies and provide for an orderly transition to election on this basis.
(4) The authority under subsection (2) applies despite the letters patent of the municipality, but a bylaw under that subsection must be approved by the Lieutenant Governor in Council before it is adopted.
(5) If a neighbourhood constituency is established,
(a) the only persons who may vote as electors of the neighbourhood constituency are
(i) resident electors of the municipality who meet the qualifications of section 50 in relation to the area of the neighbourhood constituency, and
(ii) non-resident property electors of the municipality who meet the qualifications of section 51 in relation to the area of the neighbourhood constituency, and
(b) except as permitted at an additional general voting or a special voting opportunity, the electors of the neighbourhood constituency may only vote on general voting day at the voting places for that neighbourhood constituency.
(6) The notice of election under section 77 for an election on the basis of a neighbourhood constituency must include the following additional information:
(a) the boundaries of the neighbourhood constituency;
(b) the voting place on general voting day for the neighbourhood constituency;
(c) a description of the qualifications established by subsection (5) (a) that entitle an elector to vote for a council member to represent the neighbourhood constituency.

We need organized slates running for councils in this region

As long as we have no slate names on ballots there will continue to be a huge advantage for sitting incumbents in local elections.   The time has come for people to get serious about having slates and ideally slates that go across municipal boundaries.

If you are in the loop, you know which people on your local council are allies and where they sit on the political spectrum, but most people are not that connected.   Because of the low amount of ongoing media coverage of the councils in this region, the public really does not know what the council is doing where they live, let alone the council where they work or play.   A large number of people will not go and vote in the municipal elections because they have no idea who the candidates are and what they stand for.

With the use of slates, if Bob Smith of the Civic Fruits is someone I like and back, I then know who is allies are in the race and may therefore vote for them.  Without a slate I would go in vote Bob Smith and then vote for the names I recognize, almost all of those will be sitting councilors.   Bob may have managed to get me to vote for him, but at the same time I am likely to have given 5/8ths of a vote on average to each of the sitting incumbents.   Bob is effectively giving more than half a vote to each sitting incumbent when he goes out and campaigns.

I can hear say "but Bernard, people do not have to vote all 8 of their votes."  (8 is the number of councilors in my municipality)  The reality is that the large majority of people do not like to plump their ballot, which is to only vote one or couple of your votes.   It is very beneficial to any candidate you really support.   I know from personal experience people do not want to do this, they think it is some how unfair or not right.   I ran twice for council elsewhere and suffered each time because people would not plump their ballot.  This means candidates are always campaigning for others in local elections.   The choice they have is to make clear who they would like to vote for or simply accept the public will vote for the incumbents.  

Beyond a level playing field, slates would also boost voter turnout.   Voter turnout in the last election has a close co-relation with population. Victoria, Saanich, and most of the Westshore were under 27%.  Metchosin and North Saanich were over 50%.  In Vancouver where there are clear slates, voter turnout has ranged from 31% to 52% over the last 30 years.  Other large lower mainland municipalities have tended to do better than that Saanich and Victoria.

The use of a slate allows for a way to have the media cover the election more effectively.  Right now with so many races in the region and everyone running as their own person, there is physically no way for the media to give them any real coverage.   The TC and CFAX, the core of our regional media, end up only offering a small amount of coverage to the races.   This lack of coverage is the major reason why during the 2008 elections this website got a lot of traffic.

A slate name that crosses municipal boundaries sends a signal of a common approach to regional issues which I think is very important within the CRD.   I really doubt this will happen.

If you are running for council in Victoria, Saanich or Langford, you will actively harm your campaign if you do not get a slate name on the ballot.   There is no earthly reason for a non-incumbent to run as an independent in those three municipalities unless your goal is to lose.  I think that slates would be beneficial for people running in the rest of the municipalities other than Metchosin and Highlands, certainly it would do no harm to a candidate in somewhere like Oak Bay to organize a slate.

Also, is you have a slate, you need to run a full slate.   Each spot you do not contest is one vote that will go to a sitting incumbent.   You need the full slate to reduce the leakage of votes to the sitting councilors.

Creating a slate is easy, all it takes is to get 50 eligible electors in a municipality to join an organization before the middle of August this year.  You can create a new one very easily and it does not have to be registered society, the people just have to agree they are members and you have to have a president or such.

Some pics of Fernwood

Downtown Fernwood in 1988 

Fernwood Square

Aubergine Fine Foods

Detail from NW corner of
Gladstone and Fernwood

1920s working man's house

Fernwood Hollistic Heath Centre

The Coastal Celebration this weekend

We traveled up to the Spring Western Half Yearly Meeting of the Quakers this last weekend as we do every Victoria Day long weekend.   On Friday morning we ended up on the Coastal Celebration.   The ferry had hit the dock about a month ago and sustained some damage.    The ferry was put back into service this weekend even though it was not fixed.

The ferry could only be loaded from one end which meant the cars had to drive around the centre of the ship to load and unload.   This dramatically reduced the carrying capacity of the ship.   At either end there were no cars and the outside lane was not used at all.   My quick estimate is that the the capacity was reduced by 40%.

The Coastal Celebration was also not taking any commercial traffic on the weekend.

I have been on other ships that can only load from one end and they have cars park in the U-turn part. All I can assume is that the capacity was reduced

Oddly enough, this last weekend was not that busy at all even though one of the ships was operating well below its capacity.   On the Monday we drove up to the Tsawwassen terminal at 6:45 pm and managed to get on the 7 pm ferry and there was a lot of space left.   I am used to a 1-2 sailing wait in Tsawwassen on the holiday Monday.

So why is traffic down?   Have the rates risen too high and therefore causing people to think twice before taking the ferry?   I

Tod Creek Flats

On Wednesday the 18th there is a discussion of the Tod Creek flats - these are the fields near the Red Barn Market on West Saanich road and are often flooded.   The event is at 6 pm at the Unitarian Church on West Saanich road.   It is organized by the Friends of Tod Creek and Saanich South MLA Lana Popham.

This location highlights an ongoing problem, often the best agricultural land are the wetlands.   This is why over in the lower mainland most of the wetlands were drained and then made into fields.   The best example was Sumas Lake between Abbotsford and Chilliwack.

Sumas lake was a very shallow lake, more of a swamp in many respects.  It was drained in 1924 and is now home to more than 1000 acres of very good farmland and ensured that another 2000 or so acres of land would not longer be flooded.  Those 3000 acres produce between 30,000 and 40,000 tonnes of food.   But at the same time one of the biggest wetland habitats in the Fraser Valley disappeared.

If the land at Tod flats is restored, it means the loss of more productive agricultural land in this region.   This is the sort of trade off people need to think about.   Saanich has already purchased Panama Flats and will be taking much of that land out of future food production.

Tod Creek is named for HBC fur trader John Tod.   He was a very interesting man and I wish more people knew about him.  

BC Rapid Transit Presentation

I do not know where to even begin with their presentation.   I assume there are reports out there that might be able to explain how they came up with some of their numbers, but on the surface I can not reconcile the numbers in the presentation with reality.

I wish I had paid attention to this, but the engineering consultants they brought in are experts in large construction projects and not at all expertise in traffic or transit in general.   I look at the resume of their skill sets and heavily about building rail based transit systems.

I do not see anyone on the team that knows anything about demographics.   I also do not see a single traffic engineer.   I also do not see an economist.   I am really, really stunned to find out that a group of engineers that make their living building rail based transit recommended a rail based transit system.  Give your head a shake people, this was so clearly not an objective review of what we need.

I look at the numbers in their presentation and I have no idea how they have managed to come up with them.  Just as a starting point, the business as usual case has the buses immediately taking 12-14 minutes longer to make the trip to downtown than they do now.   Is something going to suddenly happen that makes the #50 take an hour instead of 46-48 minutes as it does now?  Or how about that the LRT will be 6 minutes faster than the current #50? And that by 2038 it is projected to take about as long as the current bus takes.  

Business as usual calls for a $250,000,000 capital investment between now and 2013 - on what!?!?!?!?!   A completely new bus fleet for the whole CRD and some spares?

The rest of the evaluation is such a load of ...........   There are so many obvious errors in it before I even see the detailed analysis that all I can say is that this looks more like an attempt by someone to sell us something that we do not need and can not afford.   I am being driven to be very,very sarcastic because of the fundamentally flawed nature of all this and the clear conflict of interest the engineers working on this had.  

I have to stop writing about this issue because it is really pissing me off that a lot of money has been spent by BC Transit on a presentation and recommendation that seems very clearly to me to be more than flawed.  I am not looking forward to having us spend more than a $1,000,000,000 for line that will not have enough riders to cover its operational costs and therefore cause bus service to be reduced in the rest of the CRD.  

The LRT - how would one measure success or failure?

The LRT is a large capital investment and I think has a very high potential not to meet a ridership level to make it sustainable.    It is a very risky decision to go forward with the LRT and we have to be prepared to bite the bullet and admit it is a failure and close it if we can not afford to operate it.

Before the project goes forward we need to have some specific red light/green light situations.

• First, we need a firm limit on capital cost, and by firm I mean an absolute limit that if it is exceeded the project ends.   If that is is $950,000,000, then we need this in writing with a clear and automatic cancellation if costs go up.   If the $950,000,000 price is not the real probable cost, BC Transit needs to come up with a real number soon and make it a hard limit.
• 
  
• Second, we have to have clear operational targets.   The revenues brought in by LRT ridership should meet certain minimum targets.   These targets need to be stated up front and we have to understand the implication of how the new LRT operational costs not covered by revenues will be paid.   It is important BC Transit can accept closing the line the if the minimum targets can not be achieved.

If we can not walk away from a completed line if it is losing money, we should not build it.

If no one is willing to set targets like this and if no one is willing to commit to cancellation during construction or closing the line after it is built because of the financial implications, the people of Greater Victoria should be very, very scared.

LRT - the Questions that have to answered

1. How many riders will there be and if there is an increase from bus passengers today, what evidence is there that the ridership would increase?
2. LRT operations are expensive and need a lot or riders to cover the costs, how will the operational costs be covered if the ridership is not there?
3. While BC Transit shut down the LRT if the ridership does not meet the needs?  We need a guarantee that if ridiership does not happen that the LRT will be scrapped.
4. Why LRT when buses are more flexible, cheaper and can carry more people on the same route per hour?
5. Where is the business case that the LRT makes any sense on any level?
6. Is $1 billion for an LRT the best use of capital investment in transportation in this region?
7. Will the property owners in the region have to pay a lot more property taxes to cover the costs?  How much more will we have to pay?

State of the Real Estate Market

I pulled up the latest MLS sales statistics from the Victoria Real Estate Board and I have to say I am surprised at what happened in the market in April.   There were only 584 properties change hands in April.

I have no idea why the number was so low.   The 2011 April total is the lowest for any April for as far back as I have month to month data - my month by month information only extends back to January 2004. I had not expected the sales to be that low.

Going back just over seven years, April has normally been one of the top three months of sales in each year.   If this pattern holds, 2011 could be a very bad sales year.  

Meanwhile, the number of active properties on the market has risen to just shy of the highest we have seen in this region.   At over 4600 active listings, we had about 15-20% more properties on the market than will sell in the next 12 months.  

So what are prices doing?   

For single family homes the regional average has held steady for several months now.  In fact the median price for a single family home in April 2011 was the same as April 2008.  

For condos, the average in March were lower than they should have been because of a number of very cheap sales counted that were elsewhere.   When the VREB releases their averages for single family homes it is only for Greater Victoria.   The average for condos includes MLS sales outside of the region.  Factoring out non regional sales means March would have been up from February and the increase in April would have showed the continuation of a fairly consistent rise for the last five months.

The condo market in total value of sales remained about the same in April from March.   It is among single family homes that the total sales value dropped.   In April close to 1/5th of the total sales values was from condos, this is a high proportion of the market.

For both single family homes and condos, the gap between the average price and median price increased.     Even though the change was small, the average price for single family home rose by just under 0.5% but the median price fell by the same percentage.   What this roughly means is that the lower end of the market is falling price and the upper end of the market is rising.   With condos both the average and median rose, but the average went up at twice the rate as the median.  

So what does this mean?

I am trying not to be a voice of doom and gloom, but the data seems to be indicating that 2011 could be similar to 2009 or worse.  

On the other hand, this should be a good time for someone wanting to buy a house.   From what I hear, properties that do not have significant interest in the first week are simply not moving.    I suspect that serious low ball offers will begin to be accepted after 45 days on the market.

For us the current market conditions indicates to me that our house is still up 15-20% from what we paid for it four years ago.   Not that we have any intention of selling anytime in the next 15-20 years.

Looking at all the Federal candidates on Vancouver Island

This is a table of the amount of votes each candidate got in the recent federal election for all six Vancouver Island ridings:

1. 31,900  Elizabeth May Green Saanich-Gulf Islands
2. 31,212 Jean Crowder NDP Nanaimo Cowichan 
3. 30,679 Denise Savoie NDP Victoria
4. 30,460 James Lunney Conservative Nanaimo-Alberni
5. 27,184 John Duncan Conservative Vancouver Island North
6. 26,198 Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca
7. 25,792 Troy DeSousa Conservative Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca
8. 25,385 Ronna-Rae Leonard NDP Vancouver Island North
9. 24,997 Zenaida Maartman NDP Nanaimo-Alberni
10. 24,541 Gary Lunn Conservative Saanich-Gulf Islands
11. 24,418 John Koury Conservative Nanaimo-Cowichan
12. 14,330 Patrick Hunt Conservative Victoria
13. 8,447 Christopher Causton Liberal Victoria
14. 8.198 Edith Loring-Kuhanga NDP Saanich-Gulf Islands
15. 7,015 Jared Giesbrecht Green Victoria
16. 6,409 Lillian Szpak Liberal Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca
17. 5,351 Shauna Salsman Green Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca
18. 4,998 Anne Marie Benoit Green Nanaimo-Cowichan
19. 4,979 Renee Miller Liberal Nanaimo-Alberni
20. 4,471 Myron Jespersen Green Nanaimo-Alberni
21. 4,314 Renee Hetherington Liberal Saanich-Gulf Islands
22. 3.038 Mike Holland Liberal Vancouver Island North
23. 3.014 Brian Filmore Liberal Nanaimo-Cowichan
24. 2,995 Sue Moen Green Vancouver Island North
25. 363 Jesse Schroeder Pirate Nanaimo-Alberni
26. 290 Jason Draper Ind Vancouver Island North
27. 181 Louis James Lesosky Ind Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca
28. 171 Jack East CPC ML Nanaimo-Cowichan
29. 145 Christopher Porter Canadian Action Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca
30. 94 Frank Wagner Christian Heritage Nanaimo-Alberni
31. 80 Barbara Biley CPC ML Nanaimo-Alberni

The top Liberal came 13th overall on the island.   Christopher Causton did have the best third place finish of any candidate on Vancouver island.

The only New Democrat or Conservative that did not come in top 12 was the only third place finisher for either party, Edith Loring-Kuhanga in Saanich-Gulf Islands.   She was second best third place candidate in the election.

Fourth place Green Jared Giesbrecht managed to get more votes and higher percentage of the vote than four of the third place finishers on the rest of the island.

All six New Democrats and Conservatives finished with more than 10% of the vote.   If you break more than 10% of the vote you get a rebate of your election expenses.   Only two Liberals and two Greens managed to break the 10%.   One Liberal, Lillian Szpak in Esquimnalt-Juan de Fuca did so by two votes.

Total votes by party

1. 170,371 NDP - 42.18%
2. 145,467 Conservatives - 36.02%
3. 56,524 Green - 14.00%
4. 30,205 Liberal - 7.48%
5. 1,324 Others - 0.33%

The Liberals could not even get as many votes in all six ridings as Elizabeth May managed to get in Saanich-Gulf Islands.

This election was not good for the Greens nationwide, but it did see them build a base of support here on the island.   Almost one in ten votes in Canada for the Greens were cast for the party on Vancouver Island.   Five of the Island ridings were among their top 20 results in the whole country.  Vancouer Island is also the location of three of the eight ridings in which their total vote went up in this election

Paul Brown Announces His Run for Mayor of Victoria

I dropped by the Marriott downtown today to see Paul Brown's announcement of his run for mayor of the City of Victoria.   It was crowd of a bit more than 30 people that came out to hear his announcement.   A number of past candidates for council were there - Susan Woods, Steve Filipovic and Simon Nattrass (though he was late!) were the ones I can not remember at the moment.


Paul Brown has learned a lot about running for office since last fall when he made a run in the City by-election.   He has a campaign manager, he has a team of people helping, he has well laid out materials and he is starting the run for office early enough to have a decent chance of winning.

The focus of his campaign is about the lack of clear leadership from City Council in this last term.   The council has been seemingly drifting from one potential priority to another and seemingly are lacking the bigger picture vision.  The lack of leadership from the council is truly the core of the reason why there were problems with the blue bridge replacement.   Yes, council made a decision quickly and decisive decision making is one part of leadership.  Council fell down in not bringing along the people and letting the public have their say before making their decision.   The decision felt imposed.

The whole decision on the bridge just highlights the sense of an unaccountable and unresponsive city government.   It is not only on this one issue, but it is on many issues that the council feels like they are in almost a siege mentality and that any comment about what the City is doing is an attack on the Council and city staff.   Paul Brown wants to change this should be be elected mayor.

Paul also highlighted the dangerous fiscal situation the City is moving towards because of the needs of all the aging infrastructure.   I have been meaning to write something about this but it is a big issue and I have not had the time to look through everything needed to get any idea of what is involved.   Paul Brown has been doing that work and has seen how deep the pit is going, the potential problem is scary.

I general, I have to say I am very impressed with Paul Brown and see nothing that would dissuade me from supporting him for mayor.

Denise Savoie the choice of the majority

The last time the majority of the people in the Victoria riding voted more than 50% for one candidate was in 1984 for Progressive Conservative Allan McKinnon.  The next seven elections no one achieved that important water mark.

Here are the results

• 2011 results and changes from 2008
• Denise Savoie NDP 30,679 (+4,236) 50.73% (+6.12)
• Patrick Hunt Conservative 14,330 (-2,007) 23.70% (-3.86)
• Christopher Causton Liberal 8.447 (-1,559) 13.97% (-2.91)
• Jared Giesbrecht Green 7,015 (+763) 11.60% (+1.05)
• TOTAL VOTE 60,471 (+1,196)

Denise Savoie is the only candidate on Vancouver Island to get a majority of the vote, though Elizabeth May was the candidate to get the most votes on the island.

The result does not surprise me on any level.   I suspect no one is surprised.

What I find interesting is that at least some Conservative voters from 2008 have to decided to vote for Denise Savoie this time around.

Victoria will now be classified as a safe NDP seat by all the pundits out there.

Esquimalt Juan de Fuca

Third lucky, third time unlucky.   Randall Garrison of the NDP wins it on his third try and Troy DeSousa of the Conservatives lost it on his third try.

• 2011 Results and the changes from 2008
• Randall Garrison NDP 26,198 (+12,786)  40.89% (+18.17)
• Troy DeSousa Conservative 25,792 (+5,818)  40.25% (+6.18)
• Lillian Szpak Liberal 6,409 (-13,633) 10.00% (-24.18%)
• Shaunna Salsman Green 5,351 (+497) 8.35% (+0.07)
• Louis James Lesosky Ind 181 (----)  0.28% (-----)
• Christopher Porter CAP 145 +15) 0.23% (+0.01)
• TOTAL VOTE  64076 (+5445)

Once again this was a close race and once again Troy DeSousa narrowly lost.   This riding could have gone either way and the one riding level poll before the election had a reasonable lead for Troy.

Liberal Lillian Szpak managed to reach the number of votes needed to qualify for rebate of election expenses by one vote.   If two fewer people had voted Liberal, the Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca Liberal riding association would not have been able to get reimbursement of about half their expenses.  Odds are these two votes are worth $25,000 to $50,000 for the local Liberals depending on how much they spent.

Randall Garrison should be a good addition to the NDP caucus in Ottawa.  This also means that three of the six island MPs are now New Democrats.  They are within striking distance of two more, Nanaimo Alberni and North Island.

Troy will not be going to Ottawa as the MP for the Mackenzie Overpass.

Saanich Gulf Islands - This is truly an amazing win

So I was wrong, way off on my assumptions in the riding.  I, like most people that look at these things, did not see as a riding she could win, and we were all wrong.   Elizabeth May had what I think is the biggest win by any Green candidate in any election in the world, ever.

To give an idea of how impressive Elizabeth May's win is, in the 2010 UK General Election the UK Green leader Caroline Lucas managed to get elected in her seat of Brighton Pavilion.   But she only managed 31.3% of the vote and did not large lead in the votes.  This was a seat the Greens had managed more than 20% in the previous election and were not miles out of winning.   The win by Caroline Lucas was considered stunningly good for Green in a First Past the Post election.

So lets look at the detailed results.

• Elizabeth May Green   31,900 (+25,158)  46.26%  (+35.81)
• Gary Lunn Conservative 24,541 (-3,447) 35.59% (-7.84)
• Edith Loring-Kuhanga NDP 8,198 (+4,531) 11.88% (+6.19%)
• Renee Hetherington Liberal 4.314 (-21,053) 6.25% (-33.11)
• TOTAL Votes     68,953 (+4,505)

The total vote went up 4500 voters in this election, that is a significant increase.

I did not think it was realistic, but it turns out many Conservatives did vote for Elizabeth May.  I was hearing about more and more of them as the election went on.   I was also getting reports of the Orange Crush in Saanich-Gulf Islands.   I work with what I have access to.

The 46.26% Elizabeth May is stunningly high percentage, almost unprecedented globally for Greens.   I will point out that Elizabeth May had to achieve something like 45% to win, based on how well Greens have done in Canada and globally, this did not seem like an achievable target.   Also the Green polling numbers nationally were doing badly.   I did see the tide was moving here way had it a 60% Lunn, 40% May odds at the end.

I am stunned at how low the Liberal vote fell, I knew they would likely come fourth, but it never occurred to me that they would note break 10%.   A scenario in which the NDP and Liberals combined could not get at least 25% of the vote seemed outside of the realm of realistic.

Factoring in the increased vote, the collapse of the Liberals and Conservatives voting for May, a scenario happened in which she won.

I have to commend the Greens on how well the campaigned for Elizabeth May, this really was a serious campaign to win and the succeeded.  The bittersweet part for the Greens is the large drop of their vote in the rest of the country.

To give you an idea how concentrated the vote was in one riding, 5.54% of the votes cast for the Green party in Canada were cast for Elizabeth May.  To give you an idea how big her vote was, she got more votes in one riding than all 28 Greens in Saskatchewan and Manitoba.  She was only 3000 vote short of what all 32 Green candidates in Atlantic Canada managed at the polls.

One final note, Elizabeth May polled more votes than any other candidate on Vancouver Island.