Monthly Archives: May 2015

Election expenses under review (NS News)

Comment from Voices:  Muddy waters indeed, what is the definition of an ‘individual’?  Very recognizable names included in the approximately $19,000 in contribution from individuals.  Most seemingly having some kind of business relationship with the City (including $7639 from Councillor Keating). Leading to Dan Rather’s quote: “who gives what money to whom expecting what for it?”

Amended disclosure statement: 

http://contributions.electionsbc.gov.bc.ca/pcs/lepublished/100124596.pdf)

Election expenses under review.

Council candidates from the 2014 municipal elections, including City of North Vancouver Mayor Darrell Mussatto, are having to check their math.

Elections BC has been reviewing the campaign finance disclosure statements filed by the more than 3,600 candidates who ran for mayor, council and school board in the province last year – the first time the agency has had that responsibility. The initial campaign finance disclosure forms showed Mussatto accepted $91,394.79 in donations but spent only $74,051.24, raising questions about where the rest of the money was. An amended expense form filed last month shows $99,034.75 in both donations and expenses, including another $7,639.10 donation from Coun. Craig Keating.

“I disclosed that I had received a donation but I hadn’t put it on my expense side so it made it look like I had money,” Mussatto said. “The people at Elections BC have been very helpful. They totally understood my situation and empathized. They said these are very complex documents and it’s a lot of accounting you have to learn how to do.”

Further muddying the waters was the fact the mayor shared campaign expenses and donations with six other candidates, including Keating and Couns. Linda Buchanan and Holly Back. Much of their shared contributions came in the form of donated staff time from KT Properties to work in a campaign phone bank supporting Mussato and his allies.

Mussatto has been facing backlash for the donation on and off council as KT’s affiliate Playtime Gaming is currently petitioning the city to overturn its ban on commercial gambling. Mussatto said he never had any discussions with the company before they contributed staff to his phone bank.

Instead, the donation likely came because of his stance on gaming over his many terms on council, Mussatto said. “This is not the first time we’ve had gaming come to us. We have had it over the last 20 years. It’s been here since the lotteries started in B.C. and I’ve shown a willingness to be open minded on it. That’s my position,” he said. “I’m not dead against it. I’m not dead for it. I feel very free to saying yes or no to moving forward on this and I have no qualms with it.”

Coun. Rod Clark has also filed an updated form, showing an extra $631.79 contribution from himself to his own campaign to square the final income and expenditures.

Elections BC staff have reviewed about 35 per cent of the more than 3,600 disclosure forms filed from the 2014 election, according to Elections BC spokesman Don Main, and so far, the majority of which required some degree of amendment after the fact.

 

– See more at: http://www.nsnews.com/news/election-expenses-under-review-1.1951470#sthash.tCXlxnfk.dpuf

Cities shying away from the public

Quoting in part from Laila Yule’s article in Vancouver 24 Hrs:

Cities shying away from the public.

‘I suspect that lack of attention is just fine with some civic politicians because the less you are paying attention, the easier their jobs are. And perhaps that’s part of why getting accountability on their actions (or inaction) and what should be public information is increasingly difficult.’

.

‘City hall isn’t just about a political vision — it’s about serving the collective needs of the community.’ 

http://vancouver.24hrs.ca/2015/05/27/cities-shying-away-from-the-public

.

 

Exemplary job of preserving heritage?

In reading the coverage today in the North Shore News of the removal of the 2nd Colby Crane: http://www.nsnews.com/news/crane-kicked-from-city-of-north-vancouver-waterfront-1.1948178,

and in particular Councillor Keating’s comments ‘that we’ve done an exemplary job of preserving heritage’, many people disagree.

One person who spoke at the public input period on Monday May 25th was Grant Gardiner.  Grant itemized what has been lost on the waterfront, his speech follows:

Good evening Your Worship and Councillors

As an advocate for heritage conservation I am here to voice my opposition to the demolition of the Colby Crane.

I sat on the Heritage Advisory Commission for 8 years since its inception in 1993 to 2001.

We spent almost every meeting for 5 of those 8 years discussing the fate of the heritage structures on the shipyard site.

In 1994 there were 9 primary Heritage Structures and 14 secondary heritage structures on the Versatile Pacific Shipyards site.

In the end we saved 6 structures, now reduced to 3 since…. the 1925 Machine Shop, the 1911 Wallace Machine Shop and the 1925 Blacksmith’s Shop were demolished to make way for the Maritime Museum…. that never materialized…now we have a volley ball field.

Since then we have lost the Flamborough Head and now the demolition of the massive Colby industrial crane is on the chopping block.

Onni Development agreed to keep and restore the Colby Crane when they bought the site.

Asking to remove the crane now is an insult to their integrity and the integrity of this council.

Please weigh you options carefully when you vote on this tonight.

There is also coverage from the Lower Lonsdale.ca website:  http://lowerlonsdale.ca/articles/shipyards-to-lose-heritage-crane/

 

 

Local Government Awareness Week

Following is from Integrity BC:

.

“The death of democracy is not likely to be an assassination from ambush. It will be a slow extinction from apathy, indifference, and undernourishment.”

.

May 17 to 23 is Local Government Awareness Week

.

The awareness part of the ministry’s proclamation would seem to be directed at the public being more aware of the contribution of local governments, rather than local governments being more aware of the role of good governance.

Doug Allin, Grand Forks CAO, re-hired after $200K severance payout

Allin was fired last fall, just after local elections, but council re-hired him in February

www.cbc.ca/…/doug-allin-grand-forks-cao-re-hired-after-200k…

Question period is gone, not with a whimper, but with a bang – and a few choice words for elected officials. White Rock council voted this week to remove the 15-minute question period from their biweekly meeting, with Couns. Helen Fathers and David Chesney opposed.

www.peacearchnews.com/news/292261571.html

Citizens peppered Lillooet Mayor Lampman with questions…and asked repeatedly why Councillors Kevin Aitken, John Courchesne and Barb Wiebe were not permitted to speak. Lloyd Stock tried to direct a question to Councillor Aitken. “No” was the mayor’s response.

www.lillooetnews.net/…/council-approves-2015-budget-1.19315…

The City of North Vancouver won’t muzzle members of the public from speaking up at council, but let it be known, anyone who is disrespectful to staff could be banned.

www.nsnews.com/…/city-of-north-vancouver-flirts-with-cuttin…

Two Lantzville District Councillors resign months into their four year term

Councillors Rod Negrave and Jennifer Millbank handed in resignation letters Monday that will see them step down immediately, leaving the community short two representatives just five months after the civic election.

http://www.nanaimobulletin.com/news/301584151.html

Nanaimo Coun. Gord Fuller says he is prepared to participate in civil disobedience if a proposed ‘overtopping’ remediation at the lower Colliery dams is rejected.

www.nanaimodailynews.com/…/councillor-ready-to-take-part-in…

Burnaby Mayor would be very proud to go out ‘standing his ground’

http://www.burnabynow.com/news/burnaby-mayor-ready-to-end-career-with-pipeline-arrest-1.1942708

http://www.nanaimodailynews.com/time-for-politicians-to-stand-up-for-taxpayers-1.1942170

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
If a local government decision has left you scratching your head:

IntegrityBC's photo.

Mario Canseco: Too many in Metro Vancouver feel developers control city hall

Quoting in part from the Vancouver Sun:

VANCOUVER— A few weeks before the municipal elections last November, 68 per cent of respondents to an Insights West poll in Metro Vancouver said that developers and lobbyists had too much influence in their municipality. That figure was 73 per cent among residents of the City of Vancouver.

It is not challenging to figure out why so many residents perceive that local governments are operating on behalf of developers. Several decisions — such as the height of the Rize development in Vancouver’s Mount Pleasant neighbourhood — have led local residents to blame well-connected individuals for the changes in their surroundings.

We wanted to find out if these negative feelings are also present when residents assess life closer to home — that is, in their own neighbourhood. Across Metro Vancouver, more than one third of residents (37 per cent) believe that developers have more influence in the look and feel of their neighbourhood than any other entity. Significantly smaller proportions of Metro Vancouverites think the municipal government (27 per cent) or the community itself (22 per cent) are the ones shaping life in their neighbourhoods.

The perception of developers being superior to City Hall and residents increases with age: 39 per cent of respondents over the age of 35 said developers had the most influence.

This view is also more pronounced in the North Shore (45 per cent) and Vancouver and Richmond (42 per cent) than in the neighbourhoods located south of the Fraser (33 per cent) and those in Burnaby and East (32 per cent).

While these numbers means a majority of Metro Vancouverites do not say that developers are the most powerful force in their neighbourhood, the numbers still paint a disconcerting scenario. The community itself is last on the list of influencers across all demographics.

Even the biggest cynics agree that development can bring welcome changes to municipalities. Our survey shows that 40 per cent of Metro Vancouverites feel that the food options in their neighbourhood are better now than they were five years ago. One third (33 per cent) also believe there has been an improvement in retail options around their home.

Still, life is more than new restaurants and coffee shops or better grocery and clothing outlets. While residents are praising these new options, they are also expressing concerns about the current state of their communities. As expected, neighbourhood traffic is the key problem in the minds of residents, with 74 per cent saying that it has worsened in the past five years (including an extremely high 84 per cent on the North Shore).

The other issues that worry residents have to do with quality of life and esthetics. More than a quarter of Metro Vancouverites say that the sense of community (28 per cent), the look and feel of streets (28 per cent) and the overall character of their neighbourhood (26 per cent) are worse now than they were in 2010.

One of the main complaints that plagued incumbents before last year’s municipal elections was the notion of local governments doing too little and too late to get feedback from communities. In some cases, community associations and the interested public felt they were invited to discuss projects only after they had been approved.

Read more:  Mario Canseco: Too many in Metro Vancouver feel developers control city hall.

 

‘Citizens Must Seek Change Through Political Process’

Written Reasons for Judgment in the Appeal of the Community Association of New Yaletown vs City of Vancouver and Brenhill Developments.

Full citation is herehttp://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/CA/15/02/2015BCCA0227.htm

Conclusion;

   ‘ When the City is considering rezoning a property, local residents have two important rights. They have the right to be given information sufficient to enable them to come to an informed, thoughtful and rational opinion about the merits of the rezoning. They also have the right to express this opinion to the City at a public hearing. When citizens feel they have been denied one or both of these rights, they may seek a remedy in the courts by petitioning for judicial review. However, judicial review has well defined limits. Citizens who disagree with the City’s view of the public interest must seek change through the political process rather than the courts.’

.

Something grotesquely wrong with Vancouver’s housing market, the time for denialism is over (Ian Young, South China Morning Post)

CityHallWatch: Tools to engage in Vancouver city decisions

View Site for SaleSomething is grotesquely wrong with Vancouver’s housing market, and the time for denialism is over, by Ian Young, South China Morning Post, 21-May-2015

Excerpt:

The realisation that something is grotesquely awry with Vancouver’s housing market has reached a tipping point.

Fuelled by the special sauce of Chinese wealth – and good old Fear of Missing Out – prices are now at levels that have decoupled from the local economy, with an average detached price of about C$1.4 million (HK$8.9 million). So far, so normal for Vancouver.

But the past couple of months have witnessed a kind of awakening.

Eveline Xia – herself a Chinese immigrant – helped get the ball rolling with her very first tweet on March 18, in which the 29-year-old environmental scientist created the hashtag #donthave1million, and posted a plaintive cry about the drain of young Vancouverites being priced out of the city she loves. “To…

View original post 166 more words

Opinion: Can we make our city more affordable?

Article by Tsur Somerville in the Vancouver Sun.  Voices comment:  Perhaps rezoning the Ridgeway Annex site to allow more affordable family sized units would be a better use of the land than more million dollar detached houses?

Quoting from the article in part: ‘We can do much more to improve affordability, and create more sustainable and family-friendly neighbourhoods. Local government and the development community must offer choices that are less jarring to the existing built form. Planners must move to saying yes to developments that may not perfectly fit the myriad design rules propagated by government.’

Anthem is a multi-family housing unit developer, and could offer the City and neighbourhood another option.  Maybe this would allow more open space.

 

Opinion: Can we make city more affordable?.

Amalgamation of several single-family lots into row housing would create more family-friendly options in existing neighbourhoods, according to Tsur Sommerville.

Blaming foreign investors is distracting us from the underlying determinants of the Lower Mainland’s high housing prices and the challenges to addressing them.

How we use the land we have is in our control. If we choose to preserve single-family neighbourhoods in their current form and densities, we must recognize the challenges for affordability this imposes.

To lessen the housing burden on younger families, residents must be more willing to accept changes to their neighbourhoods, government needs to look for ways to say yes to new and more varied development, and the development industry must collectively put more emphasis on neighbourhood context rather than fighting height.

Housing is expensive relative to incomes here for three primary reasons.

First, the natural amenities and lifestyle attract us, and we are willing to pay for these features through higher house prices and lower incomes than is the case elsewhere.

Second, the developable land base is tiny compared with other cities. Within a 45-km radius of downtown Calgary, about 75 per cent of the earth’s surface can be developed for urban uses; for Vancouver the figure is 20 per cent, thanks to mountains, water, the U.S., and the agricultural land reserve.

Third, population growth: between 2001 and 2011 the Lower Mainland grew by over 130,000 households. Affordability is unlikely to act as a brake on this flow, as over 80 per cent is from immigration and reflects federal policy and the appeal of life in Canada.

Even with a major rethinking of how neighbourhoods should look, affordable single-family housing will be a challenge. At the same time that we added 130,000 households, we only added 35,000 single-family units at very most to the stock of housing. So rapid escalation in the price of single-family units should not be surprising and a worsening of their affordability is to be expected. This would be the case even if immigrants came with little wealth and foreign residents were prohibited from buying units here.

Yet it is not as though the Lower Mainland was affordable prior to the large increases in immigration that began in the mid-1980s. The ratio of house payments to median income for a standard single-family house in the Lower Mainland was 60 per cent in 1985, compared with 34-42 per cent in other major Canadian cities, where 32 per cent is considered affordable. This in-affordability measure has worsened rising to 73 per cent for Vancouver in 2013, although down from 81 per cent in 2007, while the other cities remained in a 27- to 45-per-cent band.

If our notion of appropriate family housing remains the Canadian standard detached single-family unit, we cannot avoid grave challenges here to affordability. There are no simple fixes that do not involve changing the forms of our neighbourhoods. There is land that can be converted into housing without building higher: front and back yards. In 2011, there were over 360,000 single-family detached houses in the Lower Mainland. Subdividing some of these lots to convert their back yards to other detached units, would help. Allowing more of these lots to accommodate up to four units, or to amalgamate several single-family lots into row housing along with a more forgiving permitting process would create more family-friendly options in existing neighbourhoods without wrenching changes in their character. Without the ability to subdivide existing lots, the most profitable land-use choice is to replace modest older homes with dramatically larger and vastly more expensive single-family structures. But this is not a recipe for affordable middle class housing.

Even this will not make single-family housing on the West Side of Vancouver accessible to all. Instead, a more achievable goal is to have affordable family appropriate units, recognizing that the form of these units will differ by jurisdiction. In the city of Vancouver, probably three bedroom condos, slightly more distant town and row-houses, and single-family structures should only be expected to be affordable in more distant suburbs.

Density has for many people come to be a dirty word, but density does not need to mean 30-storey towers. It can be created at a more human scale, but doing so requires that the more intensive use of land happen at a large number of locations across the regions, and not just at a limited number of sites near SkyTrain stations. And this requires a re-evaluation of the permissible land uses in single-family neighbourhoods

Communities resist increased density for very good reasons. Residents tend to like their neighbourhood the way it is, which is why they live there. The increased density they see in practice is in buildings that are dramatically higher and larger than their existing homes. If residents believe density will bring increased congestion without much that improves their lives, resisting redevelopment makes a great deal of sense.

We cannot make Vancouver as affordable as Winnipeg, but we can do much more to improve affordability, and create more sustainable and family-friendly neighbourhoods. Local government and the development community must offer choices that are less jarring to the existing built form. Planners must move to saying yes to developments that may not perfectly fit the myriad design rules propagated by government.

As citizens we must be willing to let our neighbourhoods change, which is hard, because most of us like things the way they are. Change will be disruptive, but the way we approach land use in our neighbourhoods now is making life here less affordable and accessible everyday.

Tsur Somerville is director of the Centre for Urban Economics and Real Estate at the Sauder School of Business, University of British Columbia.

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Opinion+make+city+more+affordable/11059210/story.html#ixzz3aXt7eBdZ

Lashing Out

Voices has received the following from a City resident addressed to the North Shore News (not yet published)

May 13, 2015

The Editor

News

The Mayor and his slate are on the ropes, and lashing out.

At the regular Council meeting on May 11th citizens, in person and by letter, in a very respectful manner, opposed a change to the procedures by-law that would have eliminated the public input period at the beginning of each Council meeting.

In proposing an amendment, Councillor Keating went into one of his verbose rants about unflattering social media backlash about members of the Mayor’s slate and staff. This public backlash, while not condoned by the speakers at public input periods, may indeed arise from increasing public concern about recent Mayor’s slate decisions.

I believe the underlying public concerns arise not only from this attempt to curtail public input but from a series of extraordinary events since the election:

The extraordinary amount of money donated to the election campaign of the Mayor and his slate from firms that directly benefit from the decisions of Council, and

The decision to give an exceptionally large bonus of density at 161 East Keith Road from parties that made a significant donation to the election campaign, and

The move to reconsider the long standing ban on slot machines in the City brought to Council by another significant contributor to the Mayor’s campaign and

There appears to be a commitment into public realm amenities that will benefit another contributor to the Mayor’s campaign without considering other more community based projects that have been waiting longer.

Councillor Keating talked about limiting the access of certain people from the public input process and the Mayor joined in about getting tough on administering the process. Putting this all in context, who is bullying who? The Mayor and his slate need to consider their role in the Community and start acting in the interests of the greater majority and not just the select groups that contributed to their election.

Margaret Heywood

 

Gag reflex

Gag reflex.

Voices comment:  Bravo North Shore News Editorial:

In the name of expediency, City of North Vancouver council teetered dangerously close this week to doing away entirely with the weekly public input period because of commentary staff said was “off-topic, accusatory, repetitive, untrue, promotes goods and services and, at times, includes electioneering.”

But if those were grounds for silencing debate, who among us wouldn’t have a sock crammed in our craw from time to time?

Council members ultimately made the right decision and decided two minutes of what-for from constituents wasn’t worth being labelled enemies of free speech.

But we may be headed down an even murkier path, after council moved to ban speakers who have demonstrated “behaviour that can be seen to constitute bullying and harassment” toward staff. That’s an awfully broad definition.

Instead of silencing everyone in council chambers, it could be used to only silence council’s critics.

Democracy is messy. Politicians should expect to receive public scorn. It comes with the job. And the bureaucracy that serves the public is not beyond reproach either.

There is precedent for councils banning individuals from speaking but only in the direst of cases.

If the level of discourse at the city is really so poor that we’re using the terms libel and harassment, there is another venue to deal with that – the courtroom.

We urge council to step very carefully.

If they truly want more efficient meetings, they could consider cutting down on some of their own speechifying and notices of motion, some of which exemplify “off topic, accusatory and repetitive.”

– See more at: http://www.nsnews.com/gag-reflex-1.1933254#sthash.wpF908kE.dpuf