Comparative Evaluation of Ranking Results and Actual Election Results

The FDA’s evaluation and ranking of the 2007 Lethbridge Alderman candidates is an outside perspective of how Lethbridge residents and candidates, and individuals outside of the community, can view the 2007 Lethbridge Civic Election. Also, the evaluation process is an example of an alternative to voting.

The FDA’s ranking of the Alderman candidates:

1. Parker

2. Carlson

3. Tratch

4. Wickersham

5. Simmons

6. Ferguson

7. Dodic

8. Graham

9. Hyggen

10. Ward

11. Homan

12. Layton

13. Madge

14. Lacey

15. Hway

16. Conners

Actual election results:

1. Parker

2. Carlson

3. Wickersham

4. Dodic

5. Tratch

6. Simmons

7. Lacey

8. Ward

9. Madge

10. Hyggen

11. Homan

12. Hway

13. Ferguson

14. Conners

15. Graham

16. Layton

Analysis:

Six out of the FDA’s top eight candidates, made it into the Lethbridge City Council.

Because the FDA’s ranking results were released to the Lethbridge public prior to the civic election, it is unclear to what extent the results influenced the election results.

Only 22.6% of Lethbridge eligible voters voted, which indicates a broken system. In the FDA’s view, the mandate of Lethbridge City Council is significantly weakened. Viz., the City Council only represents 22.6% of the city’s eligible voters, not to mention there was no contest for the mayor position.

Due to the significant role of influence and manipulation, politically, in elections, it is questionable that the better representatives make up the entire Lethbridge City Council. Did Lacey and Ward get reelected based on name familiarity and popularity contest? The FDA has reason to suspect this outcome, because it ranked three other candidates as better representatives than them, and yet they all ended up behind Ward and Lacey in the actual election. Also, it is unclear to the FDA how Madge finished ninth, when she was ranked thirteen, other than to attribute the result again to a popularity contest, and influence and manipulation, rather than the Lethbridge public identifying the better representatives for Lethbridge. Furthermore, Graham finished 15th in the election, and in the ranking results he finished 8th. Did the Lethbridge public, at least those who voted, merely judge him on the surface and/or based on his weak background? (Graham finished 16th in the background aspect of the FDA’s ranking.) Would the Lethbridge Public have voted different towards him if they really engaged his policies and vision for Lethbridge?

The FDA conducted the evaluation and ranking based on an outside perspective with no ties to any of the Alderman candidates or Lethbridge itself. Also, though it ranked the background of the candidates, it ranked other aspects of the candidates like policy and vision. What a candidate wore, how connected a candidate was in the Lethbridge community, how popular a candidate’s personality was, or how familiar a candidate’s name was to the Lethbridge public had no relevancy, within reason, to the FDA’s ranking results. What matters ultimately is what the candidates offer to the residents of Lethbridge.