langleywatchdog…. and more!

This BLOG Post will lay out a few important issues that you should be concerned about. Now you may look at some of these issues and say they don’t affect me (where I live), on that point I can assure you that there will come a day where you are looking for the support of others, in other communities within the Township! The Municipal Government in the Township of Langley has been successful doing what they want because they have made dividing and conquering our six different communities an art form. Don’t be fooled!

It is important to support other communities, because you could be next! Think of other communities as your neighbors, they need your support! Don’t allow politicians to splinter our Municipality!

It is interesting that our Municipal Elections have THE lowest voter turnout of the three levels of government. I say interesting because without question your municipal government is the closest to you with arguably a greater cause and effect on your daily family life. Our apparent disconnect has a lot to do with our busy lives juggling, work, kids activities and social responsibilities, however we urge everyone to focus on this election for the next 3 weeks. Get out to All candidate meetings or at the very least study their platforms and voting record. In 2014 the voter turnout for the Township of Langley was only 29.93%. Please do your homework and get-out-to-vote, YOUR VOTE COUNTS!

In this election I am promoting and encouraging the need for change. Why? What follows are a few key issues to be concerned with. (more to follow) I believe the following issues should seriously be considered when making your decision, remember the definition of insanity is “Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result”.

Issue:   Independent Representation on Council? It is a fact that independent members of Council are MORE responsive to you the electorate, than are members of a slate! So WHO is TRULY Independent and WHO IS NOT? These are good questions? How do you tell? Let’s explore….

There is a very interesting Post that is making its round on Facebook these days, that is, what does “Independent Candidate” really mean to you? Well I can speak to this from personal experience in that as an elected Alderman in Delta I was a member of a slate of 6, we did not run a full slate but nevertheless it was a slate, and in the Township of Langley I was an independent. Interestingly in the Township there is a 3^rd option in running that is somewhat unique to the Township. It is an attempt (and I might add somewhat successful to-date) at conning the electorate. What am I talking about? It is the non-slate slate which I have had the experience of learning about up close and personal when I was the Mayor. It is otherwise known as a charade and you the citizens of the Township are the PAWNS in this charade!

Now this doesn’t mean that they vote with each other on every vote, (we didn’t in Delta) BUT interestingly they do vote in unison in favor or against on votes of particular importance to their collective developer / support base primarily on development density, budgets (increased taxes and with no vigilant staff oversight) and against any forward thinking ideas such as CACs and a few others which would benefit you the taxpayer.

Don’t believe me, check their voting records. As some will remember the 2014 election featured what was then called “The Un-Election Campaign” which letter graded all candidates that were currently on that council based on solid research of their voting record. That very public campaign put a lie to a number on the current Council still pretending to be independent.

In recent days a couple of events have been held (and more planned) that further put a lie to their claim of being independent. “The Froese Team” previously denied now outed!  –

Specifically:

Event: – Thursday Sept. 20^th Aldergrove Kinsmen Center – An announcement was made regarding this event “a by-invitation meet-and-greet for Langley Township council candidates, but only those who received a personal invite will be speaking.” We have it on good authority that in the opening commentary by Steve Schafer who was arranging these events stated when introducing those invited “don’t know what the big deal is, if this was Toronto no one would care about a slate.” So who was invited, who spoke, why it was “The Froese Team”? – Jack Froese – Blair Whitmarsh – Angie Quaale – Bev Dornan – Margaret Kunst – and Michael Pratt!

“The Froese Team” / a slate in their own words!

Event: – At Angie Quaale’s campaign kick-off going back a couple of weeks at a local winery. – Jack stood up and introduced those he can work with, his words. So “The Froese Team” – Jack Froese – Blair Whitmarsh – Angie Quaale – Bev Dornan – Margaret Kunst – and Michael Pratt.

“The Froese Team” / a slate by their own actions!    

Issue: Fiscal and Financial Management / Responsibility – SPENDING OF YOUR TAX DOLLARS!

The most recent Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) Analysis dated Sept. 11^th, 2018 states the following –

• The Township of Langley ranks 20^th out of 20, last @ 50.1% of B.C.s twenty largest Cities / Municipalities in 2006 – 2016 in Real Operating Spending per Capita Growth. Remember, this spending is YOUR TAX DOLLARS!
  • What does that compare against? – Maple Ridge ranked 2^nd out of 20 @ 17.9%. A fast growing municipality that has kept spending in line.

• The Township of Langley is THE worst performing major Municipal Government in B.C.

Now I have recently seen the Angie Quaale diatribe, crying foul on Facebook with a long dissertation about this CFIB report making so many FALSE claims it is actually quite shocking and disturbing! This diatribe which was aimed at Kim Richter (and believe me I am no defender of Kim Richter) belies an underlying misunderstanding of the job she was elected to perform. She is so wrong on so many counts! I won’t go through the whole thing but on some of her points?

Quaale – “The statistics are 12 years old”

Response – NOT TRUE! This report measures 2006 – 2016 Real Operating Spending per Capita Growth. This is a very responsible 10 year measure of performance.

Quaale – “It’s a headline meant to sensationalize an issue that has no context and no substance.”

Response – Another way of putting this is BS trying to baffle brains. What an insulting arrogant and condescending statement! This is a well-researched report that provides context and substance in the form of accurate research. 10 years of actual data, actual numbers!

Quaale – “The Township of Langley is a geographically huge, thriving, growing municipality and it’s a complex environment that must consider both rural and urban requirements & it is expensive as hell to operate.”

Response – The following puts a lie to Quaale’s excuses above. So let’s see, work with me on this…. Kelowna is 3^rd @ 10.3%, Richmond is 7^th @ 19.1%, Surrey is 9^th @ 31%, Kamloops is 13^th @ 29%, and I could go on. They are large spread out Municipalities, urban and rural, all growing exponentially! There is no excuse for the Township of Langley to be last @51%! FACT, out of 152 communities in B.C. the Township ranked 96^th last year and this recent report ranks the Township at 103^rd position! We are worse than ever and nobody is doing anything about it! The 2015/16 Operating / Spending Per Capita Growth ranked 20^th or last!

Quaale – “Management of our resources and taxpayers assets is what we are elected to do.”

Response – Council is not managing anything, your rating on this survey suggests very strongly the opposite! Council as much as anything is a Board of Directors with an oversight responsibility of staff through the budget process. That IS NOT being done!

Quaale – “Voting NO is easy and if we all did it, our municipality would simply shut down.”

Response – What an absolute ridiculous statement. Saying NO is far more difficult, because a Mayor and councilors would then have to deal with priorities or find funding in other envelopes of opportunity within the Township of Langley budget. Here is a hint Ms. Quaale, search for the numerous envelopes throughout the budget that are titled “Capital Projects funded not started” (unless of course staff have since changed their wording to hide slush funds). I have written about this in the past, it is only the tip of the iceberg!  

Quaale – “Working to minimize spending, identify efficiencies and reduce waste is hard. Good governance, financial stewardship and actually voting to pass along an increase is difficult.”

Response – Welcome to the job you signed up for Ms. Quaale. It is hard to say no to staff and the community in some cases. It is about setting priorities and living within your means. It is not all about conventions, social functions and cutting ribbons. Do your job!

And so it goes, I fought this wrong-headed budgeting process in the Township of Langley when I was Mayor between 2008 and 2011 and got dumped on from great heights by members of my Council. (Some are still there and others have bought into this thinking.) This thinking in my view is the product of the preaching by senior staff, it is well entrenched. To try to break away from this kind of thinking I initiated a “Mayor’s Standing Committee of Finance” which included 3 professional individuals from the community (A CA, Federal Auditor and lawyer) and 3 members of Council. They worked very hard pouring over the Township Budget for 3 to 4 months, line by line with many questions. The result of that exercise (their report) was totally ignored by members of Council who immediately adopted a 5% tax increase.

It is no surprise to me that the Township ranks as poorly as they do, it was inevitable and nothing has changed. I made the statement back in 2009 that the budgets that are being adopted are staff budgets, they are not council budgets and that appears to be continuing to this day. Council members are only interested in what favored little fluff pieces they can get adopted within the budget. I have never experienced processes of such importance being given such obvious lip service by members of Council. Steve Ferguson and Bev Dornan were part of that calamity, and they are trying to get back in? If the VOTERS are smart, NOT!  

Issue: Process of Community Planning in the Township of Langley

In general the planning process in the Township of Langley is nothing but a top down process. This same process was going to happen to the Aldergrove Core Community Plan when I was in office until I intervened. What Council wasn’t aware of at the time was the fact I had requested staff to come back with a Community based process. That was a Community Planning Committee comprised of a cross section of the community, business, residents and social services. The members selected elected their Chair and they ran the community meetings. The Township provided a planning facilitator. All of this resulted in a community accepted and adopted Core Community Plan within 6 months. It works and is still thought of very well within the community of Aldergrove. Aside from initiating a new process my only involvement was in their first meeting – my direction to them was look at this project like you were starting with a blank piece of paper, no assumptions.

When I left office they went back to the same old process which is supported by all current members of Council. Steve Ferguson and Bev Dornan were part of that top down calamity and they are trying to get back in? If the VOTERS are smart, NOT!

During the last two election campaigns you heard nothing but promises from the Mayor about initiating a community consultation process in every community, how are we enjoying it so far? It was and is a sham and a charade and our communities are paying the price!!

In Fort Langley, Brookswood / Fenridge, Willoughby and Aldergrove, our communities are struggling to be heard, unfortunately their voices are being ignored.

Issue: Aldergrove and their never ending problematic issues!

I live in Aldergrove so what I have to say speaks to what we have to look at and live with on a daily basis, which is so unnecessary. Aldergrove is in dire need of redevelopment which requires our Mayor and Council to be pro-active with business and property owners. There are a number of incentives that can be offered to entice new development which from all appearances is not being considered. This Mayor and Council are doing nothing!

In a recent Facebook exchange Councillor Bob Long suggested that the economy would look after Aldergrove’s needs, I reminded Councillor Long that we had just gone through one of the hottest economies in the last 10 years, how is it working for you now Bob?

Pool: An INDOOR POOL for Aldergrove as promised by the Mayor in a video distributed throughout the last election? NOT! They didn’t even have the foresight to put in footings for an addition in future years. So here we are with an Outdoor Pool, not asked for, a state of the art Outdoor Water Play Park (only open at best 4 months a year), not asked for and not a part of the original plan that community members spent hundreds of volunteer hours on. But this is what we get. We will have to see how it is used between October and April! All of this and totally insufficient parking!

Old Aldergrove Center Mall: We have to see the eyesore of the old mall, closed and boarded! In my previous post I detailed an interesting Press Release sent out Sunday evening complete with a political letter of support by the developer and a layout / plan of a proposal that appears to implicate members of Council in support of this project. The proposal is an insult to our community and an insult to the adopted Aldergrove Core Community Plan. All of this coming out on the eve of an election, are you kidding me? I have never heard of such a thing ever happening. I urge all residents to look at what is being proposed, we can do MUCH better. As I said this plan looks like it was created on the back of a napkin!

Downtown Aldergrove clean up: We have a strip joint / peeler bar sitting in the center of town, the main intersection. The Township should purchase this property, demolish the hotel, rezone it and put the property on the market. Our businesses / properties down the main corridor (Fraser Highway) requires significant clean up. What about our / your Economic Development officer arranging a meeting with ALL land owners and business owners, with the presence of our Mayor, to encourage all business and property owners to get with the program.

All of this in spite of the $80 + millions of tax dollars that have been spent over the past decade to provide up graded sewer facilities and Metro Water. I was responsible for initiating Metro Water into Aldergrove and Gloucester Industrial Estates so we may grow to our planned capacity. The most recent available numbers show Aldergrove’s population as 15,498 consisting of 12,007 residents in Aldergrove proper and 3,491 in Aldergrove East (Abbotsford side of the border). FYI – The Metro Vancouver regional growth strategy calls for an Aldergrove population of 25,000 by 2040.

The much needed redevelopment will only happen with the involvement of Council. The majority on this Council have proven in spades they are not up to the task! The issues throughout our municipality are serious in every corner of the Township of Langley.

Summary:

This election is for a 4 year term, we have learned through experience that 4 years is a long time IF we make a mistake. I urge ALL residents to do your homework and get out and vote. As the old saying goes, we get the government we deserve, so let’s do our best to make the right choice for a good municipal government. Let’s elect a government that treats your tax dollars as their own, that treats your opinion with value and keeps their election promises!

It is getting close for the time to VOTE; it is long past time for serious change.

IMPORTANT DATES TO REMEMBER RE ALL CANDIDATES MEETINGS:

Thursday Sept. 27^th 7:00 PM – Langley Events Center All Candidates Meeting

Tuesday Oct. 2^nd 4:30 – 6:30 PM – Greater Langley Chamber of Commerce meet and greet Cascades Casino Ballroom.

Thursday Oct. 4^th 6:30 PM – Fort Langley Community Association All Candidates Meeting for Township Council candidates as well as School Trustee Candidates to be held at the Fort Langley Hall. No charge to attend, but attendees can bring a non-perishable food item.

Wednesday Oct. 10^th 4:30 – 6:30 PM – Greater Langley Chamber of Commerce 2^nd meet and greet at the Redwoods Golf Course.

Thursday Oct. 11^th 7:00 – 9:00 PM – Willoughby Residents Association All Candidates to be held at the Shepherd of the Valley Church Auditorium, 20097 72^nd Ave.. A suggested donation of $5 for entry.

Friday Oct. 12^th 1:30 PM – 3:30 PM – Langley Seniors Community Action Table is hosting a Township of Langley all Candidates Meeting at the Langley Seniors Centre Resource Centre in Langley City.

Tuesday Oct. 16^th 5:00 – 8:30 PM – Greater Langley Chamber of Commerce hosts a debate, open to all six mayoral candidates for City and Township as part of the chamber’s dinner meeting at the Cascades Casino. Tickets are available from the Chamber.  

RG

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I am working on a few posts at present that I believe are of significant concern to the Province, the Region and the Municipality, come back often for news of interest to Township residents.

Protect your Democratic Rights – Protect your NEIGHBORS Democratic Rights – stay informed, stay involved and VOTE!!!

Share this BLOG; forward it to your friends, neighbors and relatives!

To comment on this post – Click on this Post, top left hand corner under recent posts.

It is interesting how an election campaign instills panic on the part of politicians! Bob Long has just released an announcement on the old Aldergrove Center Mall property along with a letter / endorsement of the current Council from Sonny Janda! Reading this letter and the plan can only lead one to be furious at the incompetence of those working on this concept! Who is responsible?

Everyone knows how long all of us in Aldergrove have been waiting for some activity on this site and from time to time there have been hints that something will be coming forward. Well tonight (Sunday Night) it came forward all right and in my opinion it is a complete disaster. It is an insult to the intelligence of our community, when is enough enough for Aldergrove?

This site is THE prime development site in Aldergrove. It is the site that any and all redevelopment of Aldergrove will be measured against. As our community moves forward and grows in population we have to stand together and against initiatives such as this that do nothing more than make the statement, lets throw this at them and they will like it. Just like the INDOOR POOL that became an Outdoor Pool against all promises of Council.

The Township of Langley has spent upwards of $80+ million in new sewer lines and disposal as well as Metro Water for Aldergrove and Gloucester over the past decade to service a growing community that needs redevelopment to serve an ever growing population. Back in 2010 / 11, I initiated a NEW Core Community Plan that has been widely accepted by the community. This plan of this site, if you can call it that, looks like it was created on the back of a napkin, Aldergrove deserves better.

This, by obvious design, self-serving letter, its accompanying Press Release announcement and it’s very crude plan smacks entirely of an announcement of convenience for both Mayor and Council and the developer. I have yet to see a Council publish a developer’s letter with the message that it contained. It states the following:

“Finally, we’d like to take this opportunity to wish all members of Council and Mayor, up for re-election, the very best of luck. It would be great to see the personalities who have supported us be part of our future development and realize our vision together.”

There is no date on the letter and it’s introduction states:

“RE:      Letter of gratitude for continued support on our Aldergrove Project”

Isn’t that interesting, on the eve of the election we get an announcement on the development of the Mall with an accompanying letter patting each other on the back for a second rate development plan that just doesn’t cut it, it doesn’t even come close!

It is a property owner / developer endorsement of members of Council. One look at the plan and this letter speaks volumes on what is really going on behind the scenes. We are not a second rate community and we cannot accept a second rate development. A second rate development for THE prime development site in Aldergrove? Are you willing to sit back and accept what this Council is trying to sell? This election is your chance to make your voice heard.

After all this time this announcement, if you can call it that, is nothing more than a strip mall that is just not acceptable and as I said frankly is an insult to the intelligence of our residents. The layout, for what it is, identifies 5 buildings with an internal road system. The plan is very difficult to read but it is all surface parking showing 3 stories with residential above. It does not provide a street scape with retail unit access off of 272^nd Street, one of the main streets of Aldergrove. What discussions have taken place with surrounding properties that are not owned by the Janda’s? There should be an incredible opportunity to tie other properties into this development. Have staff or Council approached those owners? There is just so much that is wrong with this development, once it is approved our opportunity will be lost.

In the Janda letter they state in the opening paragraph “Please accept this letter as our show of gratitude for the continued support of our project by members of staff, Council and our current Mayor.” “Since our ownership of almost a decade ago, we regret to inform that this has been our most challenging development to-date. Restrictions on build out due to existing tenancies, riparian area regulation changes, and our changing socio-economic market, has created an uphill Battle for us.”

Questions that must be asked –

• In the opening sentence it is obvious that staff, Council and our current Mayor have been supportive of this plan all along which should be quite disturbing to all of us.
• “We regret to inform that this has been our most challenging development to-date.” What does this mean, we regret to inform you? This is not our problem, there are many ways the Township can assist to see a first class development take place.
• Restrictions on build out due to existing tenancies? What? The Janda’s own the property and they have tools in their tool box to deal with existing tenants. We cannot try to redevelop a key property such as this by building around an existing tenant, what is this about?
• Riparian area regulation changes? Yes there have been more changes brought in for set-backs, in this case on Bertrand Creek, however the density that exists under the NEW Core Community Plan offers the developer many more opportunities by adding density value to this site. We have to use our imagination in what this site can become. When I met with the Jandas we talked about a number of those opportunities, and that was at the time we were in the process of developing the Core Community Plan. Sonny Janda was a member of the Aldergrove Core Community Planning Committee.
• Our changing Socio Economic Market comment? We have just gone through one of the hottest expanding markets in decades and nothing has been done. The economy is still strong, look at the growth in every part of the lower mainland. If it can’t be done in this environment it won’t be done. If it doesn’t work for the Jandas they should sell this property to someone who will make it work, and there are many options out there. Nobody can force the Jandas to develop this site but we can be strong about what we want to see in our community. We are not obligated to approve what they want.

Look, developers are developers, they will get whatever they can squeeze out of a community. That doesn’t make them bad or awful people but they are business people wanting to maximize their return which is understandable, and you know what, it is the Municipal Council and staff that have to make the best deal for the taxpayer. Yes we have to be reasonable in our negotiations but we also have to have someone negotiating hard, you can’t negotiate from weakness or the wrong reason like an election campaign.  

In my last year in the Mayor’s office we were looking at an opportunity to create a development zone which would offer incentives for a developer to come in and undertake redevelopment. This is not new, any incentives offered in terms of taxes or fees will show significant return to a community and the Municipality over time. Dianne Watts did this in the Bridgeview area of Surrey and there are many others across the country.

I encourage all residents of the Aldergrove area to voice their displeasure with this action on the eve of this year’s Municipal Election, it is one step to far!!

RG

I am working on a few posts at present that I believe are of significant concern to the Province, the Region and the Municipality, come back often for news of interest to Township residents.

Protect your Democratic Rights – Protect your NEIGHBORS Democratic Rights – stay informed, stay involved and VOTE!!!

Share this BLOG; forward it to your friends, neighbors and relatives!

To comment on this post – Click on this Post, top left hand corner under recent posts.

The “South of Fraser Passenger Rail Corridor” (Interurban) Connects ALL Cities, Towns, Municipalities and Communities South of the Fraser…. Just look at the reason and rationale for our argument – Economic – Jobs – Community / Commuter access and growth – Environment and Financial responsibility (Costs per KM and Costs per Capita!). In my previous two BLOG Posts I covered the issues above from a 30,000 foot level. Now for some very real comparisons of the options….

Translink’s 10 year Plan calls for Light Rail Transit down the Fraser Highway Corridor to Langley City. WHY? It is nothing short of a short sighted parochial view that is Surrey central centric. It lacks any regional responsibility and recognition, we want to change that thinking! We have three very viable engineering reports to support our option!

I served on the Mayor’s Translink Council from 2008 – 2011 and participated on many debates with the members of the day about Metro Vancouver issues, needs and demands. I am not blaming members of that body as they are serving the population of Metro. (Up to the Eastern border of the Township of Langley – 276^th Street) For starters we have to change that thinking as our regional needs for transportation goes beyond Metro Vancouver and INCLUDES the cities of Abbotsford and Chilliwack. Housing price escalation has dramatically forced thousands to move further east up the valley. Their transportation needs are looked after for the most part by BC Transit and regional needs by the Fraser Valley Regional District (FVRD). Is this why the transportation needs of half of the Township of Langley, Abbotsford and Chilliwack are not being responded to?

The West Coast Express catchment area serves a population north of the river that is 31% that of South of the Fraser. In that case it covers both the FVRD and Metro Vancouver. For the record, as mentioned in an earlier BLOG Post, Translink (West Coast Express) pays CP Rail $20 MILLION PER YEAR for the use of it’s rail line annually. That’s correct $20,000,000…. Per-year for 5 trains a day each way, PLUS Capital and Operational costs. What are they, so far they have been hidden so we have submitted an FOI request! Stay tuned for the results!

So, back to the issue at hand. The proponents of the Fraser Highway option would like everyone to forget or more appropriately ignore the cost and the tragic environmental impact (large amount of clear cutting which would be unavoidable) of the Green Timbers Urban Forest. What have we heard just lately? In the heat of an election campaign they are saying are second-class-citizens having to accept LRT and not Skytrain? That’s Skytrain and not LRT DOWN THE FRASER HIGHWAY. What? Are you kidding me, what part of the world are they living in? Since when is it their turn and right to be irresponsible with our tax dollars? What possible rationale argument can be made to support the Fraser Highway option that is responsible? I believe the following answers that question!

If you read my earlier BLOG Post we touched on the cost issue. Obviously however, the impetus to that cost escalation for Phase 2 (Surrey LRT – 104^th as well as King George Blvd.) was land speculation that fed land acquisition inflation costs as admitted by the Translink CFO in a public oral statement. Extrapolating that inflation factor we have projected the total cost of Phase 3, Fraser Highway to Langley City (16.6Kms) to be an estimated cost just shy of $4,000,000,000 (that is $4 BILLION) as compared to the FREE USE of a 99Km passenger corridor, protected by a previous Provincial Government for passenger service. To be clear that is 4,000 – $1,000,000,000.

Looking at the benefits of the South of Fraser Passenger Rail Corridor the Fraser Highway option can be nothing more than a land deal. If approved we will all pay with our tax dollars!

This corridor sits a short 5 kms south of the Fraser Highway option, right thru the town/community of Newton! The state of the art reactivation of the South of Fraser Community Passenger Rail cost would be $1,200,000,000., as stated we have three engineering studies to support our position. FYI – Newton was created by the BC Electric Railway going through that community on or about 1910.  

I was very pleased to see one of our region’s premier columnists (Vaughn Palmer) with the Vancouver Sun broach the subject of cost escalation on our just announced transit projects, questioning how these costs have escalated to such an extreme level. (Van. Sun update Sept. 5^th 2018) (Van. Sun update Sept. 6^th 2018) These are questions that are long overdue being asked, so a well done to Vaughn Palmer! It would be worth everyone’s time to view these two columns. Now where are the answers he has asked for?

So lets lay out the expansion of Transit and their costs. We will start at the beginning with the EXPO Skytrain line circa 1986!

Expo Line – 1986

21.4 Kms – Length of the original Expo Line

$854 Million – Final project cost (1986 Dollars)

$39.90 Million – Per Km Cost                           

Included elevated stations

Included elevated guideways

Included bridging

Millenium Line Extension – 2002

31.2 Kms – Length of the Millenium Line

$1.2 Billion – Final Project cost (2002 Dollars)

$38.46 Million – Per Km cost                                                            

Included elevated stations

Included elevated guideways

Canada Line – November 30^th, 2009

19.2 Kms – Length of Canada Line                                   

$2.1 Billion – Final Project Costs (2009 Dollars)

$110 Million – Per Km cost               

Included bridging

Included cut and cover tunnels

Included elevated stations

Included elevated guideways

Evergreen Line – December 2^nd, 2016

10.9 Kms – Length of Evergreen Line             

$1.43 Billion – Final Project Cost (2016 Dollars)

$131.19 Million – Per Km cost                                         

Included extensive tunneling

Included elevated stations

Included elevated guideways

When viewing the proposed projects in terms of value for money it is relevant to compare to past projects and ask the questions that are obvious, what are the reasons for the dramatic escalation in project costs. As I have stated, the above costs are in the dollars of the year indicated and the projects have a varying number of differences with respect to tunneling, bridging, cut and cover and elevated guideways and stations. For the purpose of our discussion and comparison, all of that makes the costing of Surrey LRT that much more remarkable. WHY?

Now lets look at the recently approved Transit Projects, the distance and the cost for Surrey LRT and the Broadway subway corridor. Remember this is only Light Surface Rail with obviously surface stations.

IMPORTANT NOTE RE COSTS: The following costs were identified in 2016 (dramatically increased over 2012 and 2015 estimates), costs are expected to increase dramatically over the following 2016 estimates due primarily to land costs as per statements from Translink. We are using their numbers!                                           

Surrey LRT

10.5 Kms – Length of Surrey Newton / Guildford Line

$1,080,000,000 (BILLION$) – 2015 Estimated Cost Project Cost

$570,000,000 (Millions) – Project cost escalation in 3 years primarily due to land speculation.                       

$1,650,000,000. (BILLION$) – April 30^th, 2018 final projected cost estimate.

$157,142,857. – (Millions) Cost per KM                        

NOTE – Significant Land cost per translink.

                                   

Broadway Millenium Line extension to Arbutus

5.8 Kms – Length of Broadway project

$2,830,000,000. (BILLION$) – April 30^th 2018 final projected cost estimate

$487,931,034. – (Millions) Cost per KM

 

Projected Phase 3 – Surrey Center to Langley City LRT

16.6 Kms – Length of line Surrey Center to Langley City

$2,608,571,426. (BILLION$) – 2016 Estimated project cost based on Surrey Newton / Guildford.                                 

$157,142,857. – (Millions) Cost per KM

$3,900,000,000. (BILLION$) – 2024 Estimated project cost based on Sur. Newton/ Guild. Cost Escalation

$234,939,759. – (Millions) 2024 Estimated cost per KM based on land speculation of Surrey LRT.

2 KMs through ALR (No population / Fry’s Corner section)

NOTE – Significant Land cost per Translink

 

“OUR PROPOSAL – The Benefits”

Comparing the South of Fraser passenger Rail Corridor vs Fraser Highway Option

99.23 Kms – Length of South of Fraser Passenger Rail Corridor

16.6 Kms – Fraser Highway LRT

 

$1,240,375,000. – Estimated Project Cost of South of Fraser Passenger Rail Corridor (All In – 2023 Dollars)

$3,900,000,000. – Estimated Project Cost of Fraser Highway LRT (2023 Dollars)

 

$12,500,000 – Estimated Cost per KM of South of Fraser Passenger Rail Corridor

$234,939,759. – Estimated Cost per Km of Fraser Highway LRT

 

Land Cost – Free on South of Fraser Passenger Rail Corridor

Land Cost – High on Fraser Highway LRT

 

Universities / Post-Secondary Institutions served – South of Fraser Passenger Rail Corridor 14

Universities / Post-Secondary Institutions served – Fraser Highway LRT 3

 

Communities / Towns / Municipalities served – South of Fraser Passenger Rail Corridor 16

Communities / Towns / Municipalities served – Fraser Highway LRT 4

 

Population Served – South of Fraser Passenger Rail Corridor 1,200,000

Population served – Fraser Highway LRT 80,000

 

First Nation Communities served – South of Fraser Passenger Rail Corridor 4

First Nation Communities served – Fraser Highway LRT 0

 

Serves the Abbotsford International Airport

(1,000,000 passengers in 2019) – South of Fraser Passenger Rail Corridor YES  

Serves the Abbotsford International Airport

(1,000,000 passengers in 2019) – Fraser Highway LRT NO

 

Services Tourism and Agri-tourism – South of Fraser Passenger Rail Corridor YES

Services Tourism and Agri-tourism  – Fraser Highway LRT NO

 

Services Campbell Heights and Gloucester Industrial Parks – South of Fraser Passenger Rail Corridor YES   

Services Campbell Heights and Gloucester Industrial Parks – Fraser Highway LRT NO

 

Dramatic intrusion into Green Timbers Urban Forest – South of Fraser Passenger Rail Corridor NO 

Dramatic intrusion into Green Timbers Urban Forest – Fraser Highway LRT YES

 

Remove cars from Highway #1 – South of Fraser Passenger Rail Corridor YES

Remove cars from Highway #1 – Fraser Highway LRT NO

 

Protect Environment & Fraser Valley Air Shed – South of Fraser Passenger Rail Corridor YES 

Protect Environment & Fraser Valley Air Shed – Fraser Highway LRT NO

 

7.9% the cost per KM of Sur. to Lang. LRT

20.23% of the cost per capita of Sur. LRT”

 

Per Capita Servicing Costs Based on Catchment Areas

Approved Surrey LRT

300,910 – The Population of Surrey Newton / Whalley / Guildford

$1,650,000,000 – The April 30^th 2018 estimated project cost.

$5,483 – Cost per Capita

 

Projected Phase 3 – Surrey Center to Langley City LRT (Estimate based on Surrey LRT costs)

510,698 – The Population of Langley City / Willoughby / Clayton / Brookswood, Murrayville & Surrey less S. Surrey. 

$2,608,571,426 – The April 30^th 2018 estimated cost using Surrey LRT numbers.

$5,107.85 – Cost per capita (Based on todays cost)

$7,636.61 – Cost per capita (Based on anticipated costs 2024) 

 

“Our Proposal”

State of the Art South of Fraser Passenger Rail Corridor

1,200,000 – The Population of the area Pattullo Bridge to Chilliwack

$1,240,375,000. – The project cost based on 2010 Leewood projected cost plus inflation.

$1,033.64 – The “Cost per capita!”

 

By any measure, the South of Fraser Community Passenger Rail Corridor is head and shoulders superior to the Fraser Highway Corridor!

Value for money!

Service for Transportation dollar spent!

Fiscally / Financially responsible!

Protection of the Environment!

Job Development and growth and access!

Economic Impact for the region!

Fraser Valley Community Growth and Development!

Reduction of cars from all east west roads in the valley easing movement!

Ease of commuter movement!

 

Summary:

As they say “It is Priceless” – A very short story. In 2009 / 10 a gentleman named Tom Prendergast was the President and CEO of Translink, as some will remember. As a member of the Translink Council I invited Tom out to our Boardroom so we could make a presentation to him and his team on what we had available to us in the region. (Tom came to us from the US East Coast.) I told him that I thought that we had something particularly unique but he informed me that there were literally thousands of these corridors throughout North America. For the most part they were all abandoned in and around 1950 with the advent of the car and our highways. The thought of the day was they wanted to sell off these corridors so as to not have competition years down the road. What is of interest though AND VERY UNIQUE (in his words) according to Tom Prendergast was the vision of a Provincial Government of the day that didn’t sell it off but protected it for future passenger use. Tom was interested at the time to initiate a demonstration line, unfortunately Tom was sought after by the New York Transit Commission for the position of President and CEO and left about 4 months later. He ended heading up the world’s largest Public Transit authority in the world. The Municipal led South of Fraser Passenger Rail Task Force which I formed with Councilors from Delta, White Rock, Surrey, Langley City, Township of Langley and Abbotsford, was not renewed by Jack Froese, the current Mayor of the Township of Langley. Why, is the question? Was it pressure from the likes of Peter Fassbender and Rich Coleman? Just asking! Past reputations are hard to hide from, just saying!

It is our goal through Translink, BC Transit and the Provincial Government to form a Provincially endorsed, community led South of Fraser Community Passenger Rail Task Force. This task force would hold community meetings from Kennedy Heights in Delta up to Chilliwack to determine community support for such an initiative. This would be a very timely community process (before any firm decision or commitments are made for Phase 3) to establish the issues, needs and interest of the 1,200,000 residents that would be affected. More to come, stay tuned!

To the question on which option to choose, we are prepared to leave that up to the recommendations of a South of Fraser Community Rail Task Force that would consider ALL Options and present independent advice to Translink and the B.C. Government. Obviously our opinion is to Say NO to the Fraser Highway option and YES to open up the Fraser Valley Transportation corridor out to Chilliwack. We have made our case and will be making it further over the next number of months. Implementation and activation would be fast, it would be state of the art and it would provide economic stimulus throughout the valley, it would help feed 14 University Campuses, reduce the number of vehicles commuting and solve the environmental issues in the valley. Having said that, we want decisions to be made that are well thought out, and responsible to the region and not just one community.

DO YOU WANT A PRESENTATION OF THIS PLAN? We have started booking presentations starting Sept. 4^th and through the fall. If your community association, business association, society, service club or political organization would be interested in a detailed presentation of this initiative our team would be pleased to do so. We have a very detailed presentation including an 8 ft. map, Shaw video documentary and much much more. Our contact information is listed below.

VOLUNTEER – If you are interested in getting involved in our campaign by volunteering please contact us through the email below.

NOTE: This post is only the start of an intensive and extensive campaign for the reactivation of the South of Fraser Community Rail Corridor (Interurban Corridor) from the Pattullo Bridge through to Chilliwack! Much more to come, stay tuned!

Special Note: Our 28 minute Shaw video documentary of this rail line (produced in 2010) is on this BLOG site, click on the “S Fraser Community Rail tab” on the top tool bar to view or the following link – https://langleywatchdog.com/topics/

 

W.R. (Rick) Green

Former Mayor Township of Langley (2008 – 2011)

Home / Office 604 607-7338 – Cell 604 309-7795

Email creeksidefarms@shaw.ca

On behalf of VALTAC – Valley Transportation Advisory Committee Members:

Lee Lockwood, Roy Mufford and Peter Holt

 ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Share this BLOG; forward it to your friends, neighbors and relatives!

To comment on this post – Click on this Post, top left hand corner under recent posts.

The “Smart and Only Way” To Fiscally, Economically and Environmentally Solve the South of Fraser’s Transportation & Transit Deficit! “Pattullo Bridge to Chilliwack”, Tourism, Business or Community – WHAT IS STOPPING US?

A 99 Km State of the Art Community Light Rail Passenger Service from the Pattullo Bridge to Chilliwack, that will contribute significantly to  economic growth, create thousands of jobs, serve 1.2 million citizens, Sixteen cities and communities, major industrial parks, Abbotsford International Airport (expect 1,000,000 passengers in 2019), Agri Tourism, FOURTEEN Post-Secondary Institution Campuses and much much more!

All of this on an existing protected rail line at NO COST for use; 99 kms at a TOTAL COST that is 48% of the TOTAL COST of the proposed 16 Km LRT line down Fraser Highway from Surrey Center to Langley City or 20.23% of the per capita cost! Langley City and the community of Clayton would receive the same service and the taxpayer would pay 7.9% of the per-KM cost of Surrey LRT, PLUS serve the ENTIRE Fraser Valley while we are at it!

So to the question of WHY? Why would anyone in elected office or with staff responsibility to recommend or implement a viable option do so that is so fiscally, economically and environmentally IRRESPONSIBLE? Did anyone do their homework? Was or is there an ulterior motive? What about the potential for land deals for friends and insiders? It is a license to print money! I have spent years as an Alderman and a Mayor, I say this with some significant knowledge of how the system works and who gets to be heard, in certain communities. Speculators with inside knowledge have done very well at the public’s (your) expense. Think this isn’t a possibility? Think again! After all, it is all paid for with YOUR tax dollars!

So let’s consider a recent real life example? The just approved Surrey LRT line was estimated in 2015 (publicly) to cost $1.08 Billion, today it has been approved at $1.65 Billion, that is an increase of $570 million (a 53% increase) in a very short three years. Two important points to remember “1” the Translink CFO explained at the announcement that the increase in cost was largely due to an increase in land acquisition cost (surprise) and “2” remember this project has been considered in Surrey for the best part of the last ten years. Was there time for Speculation on land OR Insider info? You bet! Given this example, can you imagine the inflationary cost of property acquisition (by say 2022/24) on the Surrey Center to Langley City line down Fraser Highway? Remember any property acquisition will be paid for through with tax dollars, not the private sector. So the dollars I talk about below are the Surrey LRT numbers of today, using the Surrey Center to Langley line length extrapolated into a proposed cost using today’s dollars. It wouldn’t be out of the question that the per-KM cost could easily grow to $240 Million (Per KM), which cannot happen with this protected Passenger Rail corridor. The corridor is owned by the Provincial Government, B.C. Hydro and protected for passenger use at NO COST by sales contract and agreement.   

We will get to the reasons why we have to start doing what is right for the region, but first some important history. It all started back in 2009 leading up to the general election.

As Mayor in the early Spring of 2009, in the process of researching Township rights related to the heavy rail / Interurban Corridor that passed through our community, I was able to uncover the Master Agreement (previously unknown) covering what is known as the Joint Section (the Pratt Livingston Corridor – roughly 232^nd Street thru to Cloverdale). This Master Agreement came about due to the B.C. Government’s sale (1988) of the B.C. Hydro Freight Division, which included rolling stock and rails but NOT the corridor. Essentially the corridor, as part of the agreement allowed for freight use for the full corridor (Now Southern Rail) and for freight use on the joint section by CP Rail. Interestingly enough this Master Agreement, for the joint section, was a 21 year agreement renewable at either parties wish expiring in August of 2009. Why 21 years, nobody knows? The Master Agreement expired in August of 2009.

FYI – Our neighbor Peter Fassbender, Mayor of Langley City at the time was made aware of these developments as they occurred. For reasons still yet to be determined and still in question, he was never willing to come to the table to fight for such a beneficial development that would have served his community and region in such a significant way. Why? Interestingly the following happened? Again you have to ask the question WHY?

A short time after the above, surprise, surprise, then Premier Gordon Campbell, leading up to the election, (votes anyone) prompted and fed by then Langley City Mayor Peter Fassbender, announced (out of the blue) that they would build a Skytrain from Surrey Center to Langley City. A more IRRESPONSIBLE idea you could not find (I will explain my reasons for that comment shortly)! But it caught some traction locally, all-be-it it was helped along when Peter Fassbender was chair of the Mayor’s Translink Council at the time. I might add that in a subsequent Translink Board election he was defeated. He did not hold that position for long.

Well we mobilized all municipalities (Mayor’s and Councils) South of the Fraser with a letter writing campaign forcing the Master Agreements renewal through Bob Elton, then CEO of B.C. Hydro in June of 2009, two months before our citizen’s rights (your rights), were lost forever. What rights? There are a number of important protective clauses in the Master Agreement but there are two in particular! First is the fact that the Master Agreement protected the passenger rights use of this corridor (Joint Section) at NO COST, Second is the fact that should double tracking be required on the joint section due to use of the corridor for freight and passenger service, that double tracking will be done at CPs expense. Use of this corridor with today’s technology would NOT negatively affect the flow of freight movement in any way. It may cost CP Rail some double tracking on the joint section but then again they signed THE agreement, confirming they would pay its cost!

Just remember – WORDS MATTER, LEGAL CONTRACTS MATTER AND AGREEMENTS MATTER!

“For a comparison” the West Coast Express (North of the River) costs Translink in LEASE costs paid to CP Rail $20,000,000 per year (That is correct $20 MILLION PER ANNUM). Mission is paying Translink $780,600 per year for their share of this service with their contract coming up for renewal in 2019. These costs DO NOT include annual operational or capital costs, a number which IS NOT available through Translink’s financial report. What are they? Why aren’t they listed separately?

So let’s get back to the substantial reasons, specifically why we should implement the South of Fraser Corridor and NOT consider LRT down Fraser Highway! Langley City and the Clayton area of Surrey can benefit along with the entire Fraser Valley with this corridor. The Facts!

Cost Effective – This proposal for the 99.23 KMs South of Fraser Passenger Rail Project’s (Pattullo Bridge to Chilliwack) total cost is 7.9% of the Cost per KM of the projected 16.6 km Surrey to Langley City LRT line down Fraser Highway! It is 20.23% of the Cost per Capita of the Surrey to Langley LRT line. 99.23 kms from Scott Road to Chilliwack that is FREE to the Province for passenger service unlike the Westcoast Express costing taxpayers, again in excess of $20,000,000 per year for its use to CP Rail plus capital and operating costs! OR let’s put it in plain talk – (these are in today’s dollars based on the cost of the current Surrey LRT.)

• Proposed 6 km Surrey to Langley City LRT $157,142,857 per-km – Total $2,608,571,426. NOTE – In 2022 dollars based on the property and cost appreciation experience of the Surrey LRT (last three years) it could easily come in at $240,000,000 per-km for a Total cost of $3,999,000,000.

• Our proposal – 23 km Pattullo to Chilliwack LRT $12,500,000 per-km – Total cost $1,240,375,000. NOTE – This is already publicly owned land; land cost escalation is NOT an issue!

Protects THE Environment – This proposal Eliminates the need to clear cut a large amount of the Green Timbers Urban Forest in Surrey! In addition 1 Train removes 177 cars from Hwy #1 and their emissions from the Fraser Valley Air Shed. It would protect the environment utilizing NEW Proven European Hydrogen Fuel Cell Technology, dramatically reducing Greenhouse Gas emissions!

Economy / Job Growth – This proposal would Directly BOOST economic growth through the low cost movement of residents and goods South of the Fraser! It would provide direct access to the Abbotsford International Airport for passengers and employment access up and down the valley! (It is projected that passenger numbers by 2019 would be 1,000,000 passengers.) It would provide direct access to jobs throughout the Fraser Valley, including industrial parks, currently with no or very limited transportation access.

Ease of Regional Movement – This proposal would support and form an integral part of a coordinated and comprehensive transportation network for the entire region. Close to 3 million residents within the region will be able to move between North and West Vancouver, Vancouver out to Chilliwack using Bus, Seabus, West Coast Express, Skytrain and Light Rail! It would dramatically reduce traffic congestion on Highway #1 and on ALL east west road corridors.

Ease of Commuter Movement – Through a network of Park n Rides throughout the South side of the Fraser (Pattullo Bridge to Chilliwack) featuring low cost commuter stations (similar to Europe) residents of the South of Fraser will have access to this state of the art system. This system would also be served by a bus network (Ribs) feeding the rail system (Spine) in a similar fashion to that created and occurring in Greater Vancouver with Skytrain.

Ease of Movement for Fraser Valley First Nations – The Township of Langley, the City of Abbotsford and the City of Chilliwack are home to significant First Nations communities. Sto:Lo, Ts’elxweyeqw Tribe, Sumas, Matsqui and Kwantlen First Nations will receive significant benefit from this service. This service would help to connect these First Nations through convenient and inexpensive transportation to populations within 16 Communities, 14 University Campuses, Industrial Parks, Airports and Special Interest venues from Chilliwack to West Vancouver! This transportation would be key to significant employment access and therefore significant job opportunities!

Promote Fraser Valley Tourism – This proposal would open up the Fraser Valley and its attractions (Wineries / theme parks / Game Farm / Bike Tours and general Tourism) with access from Vancouver to Chilliwack! Open up transportation access to the growing Agri-Tourism industry throughout the Fraser Valley!

Access to Affordable Housing with transportation to support it – Affordable housing is being searched for by those currently trying to live and survive in Metro Vancouver. The suburbs from the Township of Langley East are becoming THE destination of choice. Unfortunately readily accessible and cost effective transportation is the missing link. The Interurban Corridor is THE solution to that problem.

Access to Post-Secondary Education – This proposal would Connect Fourteen Post-Secondary Institution Campuses and 58,000 Students and Staff daily South of the Fraser between Surrey and Chilliwack. Improve Access – Increase Enrollment! The Locations are:

• Kwantlen Polytechnic University, Surrey Town Center
• Simon Fraser University Campus, Surrey Town Center
• Kwantlen Polytechnic University, Newton
• Kwantlen Polytechnic University, Cloverdale
• Kwantlen Polytechnic University, City of Langley
• Trinity University, Township of Langley
• University of the Fraser Valley, Abbotsford
• Aircraft Maintenance Training Center / Flight Instruction Abbotsford Airport, Abbotsford.
• Canada Education Park Chilliwack –

Home to:

• University of the Fraser Valley
• CBSA – Canadian Border Services Agency
• Canadian Forces
• JIBC – Justice Institute of BC
• RCMP – Pacific Region Training Center
• CPC West

In Summary: It is long past time that our government considers cost efficiency, practicality, fiscal responsibility, economic responsibility and environmental responsibility when making significant decisions for our region moving forward. It is long past time that we look at the Lower Mainland (Whistler through to Chilliwack) as a region onto itself with one transportation provider, not two as it is today. This capital project should have no-effect on the current carbon gas tax that is held within the Metro Vancouver Regional District Boundaries. Residents North of the Fraser have the West Coast Express that serves a much smaller population at an annual rail lease cost of $20,000,000 PLUS capital and operating costs. The Interurban Rail line use cost is ZERO plus annual capita and operational costs thanks to the Provincial Government of the day. Let’s campaign for common sense, it is long overdue.

It is our goal to convince Translink, the Translink Mayor’s Council and those elected this October South of the Fraser that we want a revision to the Translink 10 year Transportation Plan. This campaign will be intensive and extensive! We are pushing to establish a Provincial endorsed Community led South of Fraser Community Rail Task Force comprised of a cross section of community members and elected municipal politicians. It will be the Task Force’s mandate to the Provincial Government, Translink and BC Transit to prove the value and interest in this intiative.

Say NO to the Fraser Highway option and YES to open up the Fraser Valley Transportation corridor out to Chilliwack. Implementation and activation would be fast, it would be state of the art and it would provide economic stimulus throughout the valley, it would help feed 14 University Campuses, reduce the number of vehicles commuting and solve the environmental issues in the valley.

Again, FACTS matter, WORDS matter, LEGAL CONTRACTS matter and AGREEMENTS matter!

DO YOU WANT A PRESENTATION OF THIS PLAN? We have started booking presentations starting Sept. 4^th and through the fall. If your community association, business association, society, service club or political organization would be interested in a detailed presentation of this initiative our team would be pleased to do so. We have a very detailed presentation including an 8 ft. map, Shaw video documentary and much much more. Our contact information is listed below.

VOLUNTEER – If you are interested in getting involved in our campaign by volunteering please contact us through the email below.

NOTE: This post is only the start of an intensive and extensive campaign for the reactivation of the Interurban Corridor from the Pattullo Bridge through to Chilliwack! Much more to come, stay tuned!

Special Note: Our 28 minute Shaw video documentary of this rail line (produced in 2010) is on this BLOG site, click on the “S Fraser Community Rail tab” on the top tool bar to view or the following link –  https://langleywatchdog.com/topics/

W.R. (Rick) Green

Former Mayor Township of Langley (2008 – 2011)

Home / Office 604 607-7338 – Cell 604 309-7795

Email creeksidefarms@shaw.ca

On behalf of VALTAC – Valley Transportation Advisory Committee Members:

Lee Lockwood, Roy Mufford and Peter Holt

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Protect your Democratic Rights – Protect your NEIGHBORS Democratic Rights – stay informed, stay involved and VOTE!!!

Share this BLOG; forward it to your friends, neighbors and relatives!

To comment on this post – Click on this Post, top left hand corner under recent posts.