With a week to go before nominations must be submitted, the Corporation of Hamilton mayoral election is already a three-horse race with the current Mayor and two of the three Aldermen standing.

At the very least, that means there will be two vacancies for Alderman since Aldermen cannot run for their current posts if they are running for Mayor.

The big race remains the battle for the Mayor?s Parlour, and it is difficult to say how it will go.

Mayor Lawson Mapp says he wants a third term to see through a deal for a city hotel at Par-la-Ville car park and for the plans for the Hamilton waterfront to take shape. He can boast experience having already been Mayor for two terms.

But he also faces questions over his integrity again, as he did in the last election. These concern, for want of a better term, term limits. Mr. Mapp apparently told other members of the Corporation at the time of his first election that he would only be in office for one term.

He then ran a second time, sparking a flurry of resignations, and won. He is now accused of reneging on a gentleman?s agreement agreed in 1997 that no Mayor should be in office for more than two terms.

Mr. Mapp admits the agreement was made, but argues that there is nothing in the Corporation?s rules that prevent him from running for a third time. And the Mayor, who is black, has also pointed out that prior to 1997, a number of white Mayors held the post for multiple terms.

At the time of the last mayoral election, this newspaper noted ?a gentleman?s club? atmosphere existed at City Hall, and had little sympathy for agreements struck behind closed doors which often seemed to be made to ensure a smooth ride to the top for officials rather than for an open and vigorous debate on the future of Hamilton.

But Mr. Mapp?s decision to run again may do him more harm this time, particularly since his opposition is much stiffer than that put up by Graeme Outerbridge two years ago. In this case, Mr. Mapp?s willingness to break agreements could play a much larger part in an election in which a plurality rather than a majority of votes could secure victory.

In Deputy Mayor Sonia Grant and Alderman Jay Bluck, the field has two candidates with almost as much experience in the Corporation as Mr. Mapp himself.

Ms Grant is emphasising her chairmanship of the Corporation?s finance committee, noting its strong financial position and clean balance sheet. Mr. Bluck is putting his emphasis on law and order.

What?s missing from this campaign is anyone who seems to have any candidate who has deep reservations about the Corporation?s $630 million plans for the Hamilton waterfront.

This is surprising, because the plans have stirred up a fair amount of controversy and opposition, and it would appear that all three candidates, having been involved in the drafting of the plan, are broadly in favour of it although all are quick to hedge by saying nothing is set in stone.

It would seem likely that a candidate running against the plan ? at least as it is currently drafted ? would sweep up a good many disaffected voters in a race which could then be split four ways.

Finally, Hamilton could do with a reform candidate who would push for more transparency in Corporation affairs. Mr. Mapp ran four years ago on this platform but has little concrete to show for it today, while Ms Grant and Mr. Bluck have been relatively silent on the question, which is a shame.