langleywatchdog…. and more!

The Truth Explained – Langley SkyTrain cost is $7 Billion (not $6 Billion) …. Up 74% since their March 2024 projection – How did all of this happen?

The story of how this happened? (You can’t write this stuff as they say, but I will try) The multi-billion-dollar decision to put SkyTrain into Langley was made thanks to the efforts of Doug McCallum, Mayor of Surrey in the first Mayors TransLink Council meeting, post his 2018 election. Mayor McCallum attended the meeting with pre-arranged voter support in place for his motion to scrap the Diane Watts approved $1.6 Billion light rail transit (Guildford, down 104^th to King George Blvd South to Newton), in favor of SkyTrain to Langley City. McCallum was emphatic, they could build SkyTrain to Langley City for $1.65 Billion and not a penny more! This, was all thanks to the weighted vote from Surrey and Vancouver at the Mayors TransLink Council.

You see, the 2018 election saw the election of a number of new Mayors attending their first TransLink Mayors Council meeting with no knowledge of the weighted vote; and they were blindsided. A vote was held, and thanks to this set up, provisional support was given for this initiative. TransLink staff then proceeded to build a justification for this change, and shockingly in a relatively short space of time (obviously with a clear lack of due diligence in terms of cost investigation and projections) they were successful in selling this bill of goods to the Mayors TransLink Council – it received final approval. This was just the start of the TransLink incompetence on this file that has put all of us in the situation we are in today. It is scary how major decisions involving Billions of dollars are made, on your behalf. But then it got progressively worse!

Within a couple of years, TransLink went to the province for financial help, again, crying poverty. (TransLink owns their own financial destiny due to dumb and very expensive past decisions.) So, compounding this self-inflicted problem TransLink found themselves in, Premier John Horgan, leading up to a provincial election, without any detailed due diligence in terms of cost projections, announced that the province would take over the Langley SkyTrain project! This was a Political Decision – nothing more. Not one that was costed out, analyzed in detail, or justified by any form of Transit Business Plan! The estimated cost of the Langley SkyTrain project has gone from $1.6 Billion to $2.1 Billion, to $3.2 Billion to $3.95 Billion, to $4 Billion, and now $7 Billion!

Why $7 Billion and not $6 Billion – because this extension required a major new operations and maintenance center in North Cloverdale costing a further $1 Billion. In what is a further very questionable development, on Dec. 11^th, 2023 a Cabinet-Order-in-Council was signed (by Surrey Green Timbers MLA Rachna Singh) taking out a nearly 37-acre parcel of land (176^th & Fraser Highway) out of the Agricultural Land Reserve. The land was valued at $5.65 Million and was sold for $8.052 Million last November? Really? Who sold the land at that inflated price?

All of this plus a further year of delay to get to 2030. Here is my bet going forward, if the full extension is built, and that is a big if – it won’t be finished before 2032 and will cost north of $10 Billion.

So, to the announcement of this week, buried within a flowery press release about SkyTrain coming to Langley, almost like an after-thought was information regarding the exploding budget. All of this with disingenuous explanations from Minister Fleming as to the reasons for it?

In outlining his excuses for the cost increases and delays the reality is, it falls back on the provincial government’s incompetence and lack of due diligence in their takeover and planning of this project. One primary reason that hasn’t been touched on in the public discourse is the issue of the Serpentine Flats. To reach Langley City you have to go through roughly 2 ½ kms of the Serpentine Flats (Area of Fry’s Corner 176^th and Fraser Hwy). If you talk to those that have had experience in drilling wells in this area for years’ they will tell you that you have to go down 400 ft. or more to find bed rock that could hold up and withstand the vast weight of an elevated cement guideway. A guideway requires absolutely no movement to maintain proper and efficient operation for linear induction motors.

You can build anything if you pour enough money into it. In our research and after FOI requests we conclude they had not done any comprehensive geotechnical surveys in this area prior to any published cost estimates. A sign of total incompetence!

TransLink is Bankrupt! – I was a member of the Mayors TransLink Council 2008 – 2011 and I can tell you we had serious financial issues back then. The issues of declining gas tax revenue and fare evasion were serious issues at that time. What we have never heard of is any attempt by the TransLink Mayors Council or Board of Directors to do any kind of internal productivity audit on service and internal operations, this is unfortunately consistent with most if not all of our publicly funded institutions like Metro Vancouver. The B.C. Conservative Party has just announced they would initiate a performance audit of TransLink should they be elected. Is the public getting value for their tax dollar, NOT! It seems SkyTrain has become a demanded service by the public in every part of the region, however TransLink and the B.C. Government have not communicated the unsustainable costs for this mode of transit. This is a big reason for TransLink’s serious financial dilemma, constantly going to senior levels of government to cover operational costs to cover their past incompetence.

Think of this number; Based on the current published cost estimates for the Langley SkyTrain, 16 KMs at $7 Billion = $437,500,000 per km! – Pure insanity!

TransLink’s most recent public statement says they will be short $600 million per year by 2026 or they will have to start drastically cutting the transit service they provide. I will point out that the operational cost and TransLink’s share of the capital cost of the Langley SkyTrain project is not included in the above shortfall. Throughout my term I banged the table for the recognition of transit need in the Township of Langley, and I hate to say with very little improvement. I know Mayor Woodward is doing the same but is faced with the same frustration. We have just come through a dark decade with Jack Froese as Mayor and I might add as vice-chair of the Mayors TransLink Council – he was no more successful other than supporting the approval of SkyTrain to Langley City – We now see the disastrous results of that shortsighted initiative.

The Hidden Cost of TransLink? – We often hear TransLink cry the blues about the declining gas tax revenue as well as fare gate revenue – have you ever tried to find out the revenue they receive from each revenue source? You can’t, it isn’t available. The following are their category sources of revenue from every member municipality and city in Metro Vancouver:

Parking Tax – Now 24% (adds 15 cents hr. to aver. $5/hr. per parking stall

Property Tax – 7% (increase per yr. of the TransLink Property Tax base per yr.)

Gas Tax – 18.5 cents a litre (highest gas taxes in North America)

Transit user fees – Single use +5 cents to 10 cents/Day Pass +25 cents/monthly passes +$2 – $3.

B.C. Hydro Transit Levy – Regular Single-Family dwelling 1.87 month – Last year $21,585,432 Yr.

Development Cost Charges – Sing. Fam. $2,975 unit, Townhouse $2,470 unit, Apartment $1,545 unit, Retail Service $1.25 sq. ft., Office $1.25 sq. ft., Institutional .50 sq. ft., Industrial .30 sq. ft.

NOTE – The B.C. Government allowed the imposition of TransLink DCC costs – and they are blaming others for housing affordability?

There is a very cost-effective Transit option for South of the Fraser – There is a BETTER CHOICE?

In a Global interview on Thursday August 15^th, Minister Rob Fleming stated they had three choices 1) Stay the course despite cost 2) Pare down the size of the project or 3) Cancel it! Well Minister Fleming, we strongly suggest that you had a 4^th, and very good choice – Reactivate the existing Interurban which could be done within 3 years, it would serve 10 times the population with more reach, value and economic impact than SkyTrain. The cost to reactivate the Interurban would be roughly 4.2% of the cost per km of SkyTrain and 4.4% of the cost per capita of SkyTrain. Despite our complete cooperation with the provincial government, including providing volumes of information, paying for meeting time and space at their request ($1,000), we have been denied a meaningful one-hour meeting with Minister Fleming – 1 year trying!

The South Fraser Community Rail Society (SFCRS) has campaigned for the reactivation of the Interurban Corridor with state-of-the-art Hydrail Passenger Rail Service between the Pattullo Bridge and the City of Chilliwack for the past 7 years. This 99 km corridor is owned by the public with protected passenger rights, with use at no cost. It is an existing and operating rail corridor, the majority by a small line rail road. As part of the renewed Master Agreement, the sale of freight rights through the joint section (The Langleys), CP agree to pay for any double tracking should it be required and that freight and passenger traffic would be given equal use, among a number of other stipulations.

The facts are that this corridor connects 16 Population Centers (14 stops – Pattullo Bridge, Kennedy Heights N. Delta, Newton, Sullivan Station, Cloverdale, Langley City / TOL, Trinity TOL, Gloucester TOL, Abbotsford Old Town, Abbotsford Sumas Way, Huntington, Yarrow, Sardis, and Chilliwack) – 14 Post-Secondary Institutions, Industrial Parks, Abbotsford International Airport via a Spine (Rail Line) and Rib (Bus) Transit system in the same way that SkyTrain serves Metro Vancouver. Because of the large tracks of ALR land in the Fraser Valley this corridor goes through the ALR and connects developable land within each of these population centers up and down the valley. Today, over 75% of trips starting South of the Fraser end South of the Fraser (the opposite to what it was in 2005) but their desired destination is not served by the current Express Bus which, as an aside, is tied up in the Highway #1 congestion that we are fighting every day. There currently is no Interregional Transit South of the Fraser and there won’t be for 11 years at the earliest!  

This campaign to reactivate goes back a couple of decades, significantly ramping up over the past 7 years. Over this period of time the SFCRS has made over 500 in-person presentations, produced an 88 page “Community Business Plan”, considered a major stake holder by the B.C. Government and lobbied successfully for the Fraser Valley Regional Rail Pre-Feasibility Study published July 8^th 2022.

Support for this initiative include the following –

• All South of Fraser Cities and Municipalities by resolution 2009
• 88% overall Public Support in a Mario Canseco ResearchCo Poll – North Delta to Chilliwack
• John Horgan – UBCM Meeting in Whistler September 2022
• All Post Secondary Institutions – Members of the Municipal Community Rail Task Force
• University of the Fraser Valley Transportation Demand Management Strategy
• Township of Langley UBCM Resolution 2023
• Lower Mainland Local Government Association (LMLGA unanimous support)
• Surrey Board of Trade
• Fleetwood Business Improvement Association
• Hydrogen B.C. / Canadian Hydrogen Fuel Cell Association
• B.C. Indigenous Housing Society
• Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
• B.C. Government Fraser Valley Regional Rail Pre-Feasibility Study

Summary – So, the Highway #1 widening won’t be done until the 30s, and Skytrain won’t be done until the 30s if it ever gets done. Both projects are way over their proposed budget even before the projects get started. A reactivated 99 km Interregional Interurban passenger rail service could be operational at a fraction of the cost (pennies on the dollar) compared to SkyTrain as previously stated. All that is needed are road crossing gates at all road crossings (They are already in place in a number of locations), 14 European style Passenger Platforms (Not expensive SkyTrain Stations) in strategic locations between North Delta and Chilliwack. The track and track beds are maintained to national standards. The average speed would be between 60 and 80 KM per hour with an estimated 90-minute trip between Chilliwack and the Pattullo Bridge.

This service could be operational within 2 ½ – 3 years. What are the good people in the valley supposed to do, wait until 2034 before they can get a tiny bit of help to move around? Using provincial government traffic numbers just east of 200^th street, traffic is increasing at a rate of 20% per year. With the reality of Highway 1 widening just to Abbotsford not scheduled to finish until 2035 (a real date not a political dream) at best, what is the exponentially growing population of the Fraser Valley going to do? Tram Train Passenger Rail is the popular form of transit in virtually every part of the world including right here in Canada – Alberta, Ontario and Quebec. It is long past time we invested in affordable, convenient and effective public transit.

For full detail on this proposal check out the following links –

Web site www.southfrasercommunityrail.ca View 4-minute video on this site.

Facebook https://www.facebook.com/connectthevalley

You Tube Channel – https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCZxkXqvEP0EnV-CCK-LMaw

It is Time for Change – David Eby is a drastic change from John Horgan and it is not a good change. The NDP’s incompetence is showing in spades with their inability to manage and control major infrastructure projects, their imposition of their Social Engineering philosophy including the overbearing imposition of their housing policy on municipalities (without discussion and conversation) removing their ability to plan and listen to their communities, their legalized drug policy and the out-of-control crime problem. In short, they over their heads in their ability to effectively govern, we need change now!

RG

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

I am working on future posts that I believe are of significant concern to Township of Langley Residents, come back often for news of interest to Township residents.

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.

In an unheard-of overreach by the NDP government has refused the TOL’s request for an extension in consideration of the serious deficient infrastructure issue which prevents municipalities to meet the government’s demand for even more housing than what they are accepting at present!

This action MUST be challenged by you the voter in this year’s B.C. Election if you want to protect your Municipality and community’s quality of life – reject the NDP!

Threats rather than communication, dialogue / discussion is NOT acceptable!!

The centrally controlled Eby administration, took what can only be described using a sledge hammer to kill a flea on the shortage of housing issue, (I describe it as being brain dead!) The community ramifications of their new housing policy in Bills 44, 46 and 47 cannot be willingly accepted by us, the Township taxpayer and voter!

In a media interview Eby conducted well before the introduction of these new Bills, after his public comments about what was to come, the media asked – “What about Parking”? His answer was “I am not worried about parking I am only worried about housing”? What world does David Eby live in?

To be clear, Municipal Government is a product of the Provincial Government; they have full control over what municipalities can and cannot do, however, I would argue Municipal Governments are the hallmark of our democracy and much closer to the people. Using a heavy -handed approach against a community’s democratic rights, without consultation, discussion and negotiation, is an outrageous act. – they should, and hopefully will pay the price! Disregarding each municipalities uniqueness, wishes and more, should leave all of us completely outraged and activated going into this year’s election.

The imposition of Bills 44,46, and 47 is the creation of a centralized campaign by Minister Ravi Kahlon and Premier David Eby who haven’t had one day of experience in Municipal elected office or on the issues faced by municipal governments and obviously haven’t spent a second of time considering the investments the public have made in their housing choice. It will not decrease the price of housing, but then why let the facts get in the way of a good story?

Minister Ravi Kahlon quote: Langley Advance Times (Mathew Claxton) – B.C. Housing Minister Ravi Kahlon stated “that doesn’t mean the end of the traditional single-family home just yet.” That statement sure gives you confidence, doesn’t it? NOT!

Township of Langley Mayor Eric Woodward quotes: Woodward likened the legislation to “surgery on housing policy using a chainsaw”! A very appropriate comment! “When they take these policies and drop them on the whole province, they’re really ignoring the nuance of how different communities do development differently…. By ignoring that they are going to cause a lot of damage.” “Provincial politicians are not going to prevent me from listening to my community.”

NDP Social Engineering is back with a vengeance as I stated in my previous BLOG Post. What do I mean by that? “The imposition of changes to our society’s norms, expectations, and wishes drastically changing universally accepted rules surrounding the make-up of our communities without due political process.” It removes your duly elected government’s ability to serve your needs and wishes properly!

In the case of the Township of Langley letter (below) received from Minister Ravi Kahlon in answer to the TOLs request for a one-year extension dealing with the government’s housing legislation. Without discussion, review, questions or a phone call re the infrastructure deficiency evidence provided by the Township of Langley in support of their requested extension, the Township of Langley’s request for extension was denied.

What infrastructure are we talking about? Water, sewer, roads, community centers, arenas, pools, parks (Passive and Play Fields), fire, police, transit, hospital capacity, electrical grid and so much more. But no, the government without investigation, communication or discussion are bulldozing their way into the rights of your municipal government that you elected to protect your rights, against this kind of intrusion.

In another warning letter just received from the Provincial Government stating the Township needs to designate an area around the future Willowbrook SkyTrain Station for high-density development. The letter, from Minister Rob Fleming, was a pointed reminder and “recommendation” (A Threat) that the Township put the designation in place no later than Oct. 31. By the way there are no parking requirements or payment of Municipal DCC and CAC fees associated to this high-density development bunder provincial regulation? So, you the property tax payer in the Township will have to pay up! Really? – What world do they live in?

In response, Mayor Woodward states “For the Willowbrook area, the BC NDP are requiring that we designate an area for significant quantity of tower density years before SkyTrain is even projected to be completed,” Woodward said. “It is being imposed without a community planning process for schools, parks and other needed amenities to provide for a complete community.” Woodward said that “mandating densities will cost taxpayers more in unnecessary land costs by removing the ability for the Township to collect funds via bonus densities.”

What makes all of this worse, if that is possible – they are imposing their will against and doing away with years and years of municipal community planning that have cost millions of dollars to create and years of input by you, the public. The provincial government, as part of this action is eliminating any parking requirements on any and all developments, imposing 3 – 6 units on a traditional single-family lot, all with absolutely no say from your municipal government! It all equates to the eventual destruction of our quality of life and of our communities as we know them.

B.C. Government Letterhead

July 25, 2024                                                                                                                                                      Reference: 69354

Jason Winslade

GM, Municipal Administration, Facilities and Corporate Projects

Township of Langley

20338 – 65 Avenue

Langley BC  V2Y 3J1

Email: jwinslade@tol.ca

Dear Jason Winslade:

Thank you for your application for an extension to the small-scale multi-unit housing (SSMUH) zoning bylaw requirements pursuant to Section 786 of the Local Government Act (“Act”), submitted to the Province June 20, 2024.

I have considered the application in accordance with the legislation. The request for extension on the basis of Council’s deferral is refused. Based on the application materials submitted, it is not apparent enough (from the documentation provided) that infrastructure upgrades are immediately needed in order to address risk to public health, safety, or environment.

Pursuant to Section 785 (1) (b) of the Act, you must adopt a zoning bylaw that complies with Section 481.3 in relation to the areas identified in your request within 90 days after the date set out in this notice of refusal.

Thank you again for writing.

Sincerely,

Ravi Kahlon

Minister of Housing

cc:          Chanpreet Kooner, Administrator (Acting) – Wendy Bauer, Director

Premier Eby and Minister Kahlon are busy sending out messages via Social-Media that Municipalities and Cities are all on board – Nothing could be further from the truth, Municipalities / Cities are being threatened and have no choice. Some are taking a stand, lets stand with them and defeat the NDP!

Township Housing Statistics: For those living in the Township of Langley, they will know and will have experienced the explosive population growth, thus the massive population increase and the inability of infrastructure to keep up with development. The following statistics reflect a municipality that is doing its part in providing housing starts while working hard to making up for years of not building the infrastructure required to sustain that population.

Township of Langley Units Approved, Not Yet at Construction

Apartments:                                                      69%                                       5,193

Townhouses:                                                     21.7%                                   1,630

Single Family Attached Rowhomes:         1.9%                                      144

Single Family:                                                    7.4%                                      554       

Township of Langley Housing Unit Approvals 2022 – 2024

Council Year       Total (Multifamily / Town House / Single Family)

2022                     66

2023                     6,443

2024                     1,030

Total                     7,539

Township of Langley Issued Building Permits Under Construction

Community                       Total (Multifamily / Town – Row House  / Single Family)                    

Aldergrove                          290

Brookswood Fernridge   199

Fort Langley                          28

Murrayville                            32

Northwest Langley               12

Rural Areas                           306

Walnut Grove                                                   

Willoughby                         2,040

Willowbrook                     

Still unknown                     982

Total                                     3,889   

Elections are your opportunity to make a statement!

In Summary – This election is your last chance to send a message to this NDP government to ensure a future government will revisit this undemocratic move! Remember, you get the government you deserve, take action now. Unfortunately, the disaster of this move will not be truly felt for a number of years if the NDP are elected – then it will be too late.

Threat by your NDP provincial government: Make no mistake about it, this is a threat against your duly elected municipal government – not a polite reminder as they will suggest. As Mayor of the Township of Langley I was confronted with a threat by then B.C. Liberal Minister of Transportation Kevin Falcon in an open letter stating that I either accept the road network (Mufford Crescent Diversion) that the B.C. Government, Federal Government, TransLink and 12 funding partners (part of the Roberts Bank Rail Corridor project) proposed or he would take the money and move it elsewhere! I also received the same verbal threat from him coming out of his office after an MFA meeting! Their proposal? A 4-lane road cutting through the historic Hudsons Bay Farm, over the rail tracks and Glover Road then through the middle of the Bella Vista Farm connecting to a two-lane country road at 64^th and 216^th. I lost two votes in my council despite two open houses and a public meeting and I lost the preliminary vote with the ALC. Finally, we filed a Minority Report (which my Council went apoplectic over) with the ALC refuting the erroneous information in the Pacific Land Group Report on which a final decision was to be made. Two years later, thanks to Richard Bullock then Provincial Chair of the ALC, and a further discussion with me – we won on a tie vote. (FYI – Richard Bullock was removed from that job by the B.C. Liberal Government shortly- after his vote on this proposal.) That negative vote by Richard Bullock caused a tie vote which rejected their proposal based on the three key issues we profiled in our minority report. That decision, saved over 300 acres of prime agricultural land in the Milner Valley designed for future development, changing the character of the Township of Langley forever. Just a sign of what really had gone on in the Township of Langley for decades. It was nothing more than a major land deal orchestrated by local power brokers for the benefit of a few friends and insiders. Their efforts and plans failed, you can fight and win!

By the way, they never did move the money as threatened; we approved a more appropriate overpass and road configuration that didn’t wipe out hundreds of acres of farmland. So much for Rich Coleman’s constant blathering threats about not putting provincial funds into the Township because I wouldn’t capitulate to his government’s demands.

There are never any guarantees, but we owe a great deal of thanks to Mayor Woodward and his majority on Council to stand up to this NDP bullying on our behalf. Believe me when I say, the easy decision is to throw up your hands and capitulate, the hard decision is to take a stand and not roll over.

For all of the foregoing facts, I am strongly recommending a vote for the B.C. Conservative Party. Provincial parties who threaten municipal and city governments have crossed the line of trust. In the case of the NDP, their move to Social Engineering should not be acceptable by any of us.   

RG

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

I am working on future posts that I believe are of significant concern to Township of Langley Residents, come back often for news of interest to Township residents.

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 Social Engineering of the past is back…. It has now become their flavor of the day!

To be clear I am and have been a staunch free enterprise activist and supporter since 1975 working with and for free enterprise against a socialist movement, the NDP, initially to defeat the Dave Barrett government of 1972 – 75. (Read my BIO on this BLOG, link above.) That support was seriously tempered with the election of Gordon Campbell stemming from my past elected experiences serving with him at Metro Vancouver and completely off the board with the subsequent elections of Christy Clark and then Kevin Falcon. (Read my previous post) The actions of these free enterprise leaders caused their own just demise, in very dramatic fashion.

Fast forward to my support for the NDP starting back in March 2017. Explanation – Through an NDP friend we met with John Horgan (Pre 2017 election) – presenting our South Fraser Community Rail proposal – reactivating the Interurban Corridor with Interregional Passenger Rail Transit – Pattullo Bridge to the City of Chilliwack. (More on this proposal and its status in a future post.) That meeting went very well. John Horgan’s question – What was our ask? Should he be elected – we asked that he commission a comprehensive independent study for Rail Transit South of the Fraser. In short, we lobbied for that study in a Minority Government over 2 ½ years – that study was announced after his majority election win, in the Throne Speech of February 11^th, 2020. Beyond that issue, as there was never any guarantee, our support for John Horgan was broader than that, it stemmed from his personal connection with supporters, his common-sense approach to government, his pragmatism, and in our opinion his ability to neutralize many of the crazies (extremists) in his party. NOTE – every party has extremists left or right – it is how you deal with them and neutralize their impact that is important. You cannot get elected embracing the extremes!

To be clear, our extensive support for the NDP in 2020 went beyond the writings in this BLOG, they were personal and financial supporting our local MLA which continued, despite some local disappointment, up to a while after David Eby’s election as leader. We have been very disappointment on many fronts since then with the party and our local MLA in Langley Walnut Grove.

GOOD Government is just that, GOOD Government – This is not good government!

It is not a left or right issue.

As I said, the NDP’s new leader David Eby has disappointed on many fronts, everything counter to his predecessor – “He is NO John Horgan”. I/we were certainly willing to give him a chance, but to no avail. In an interesting aside, while I was writing this BLOG Post, Andrew Weaver, the former Green Party Leader, who negotiated a “Confidence and Supply Agreement” with John Horgan, which I might add allowed the NDP to win a Minority Government, giving them a chance to govern, wrote a very revealing Op-Ed, it says it all.

Andrew Weaver Quotes: – “Since Eby assumed the Premier’s Chair, radical ideological-driven activism, empty promises with destructive consequences, an out of touch hubris embody the hallmarks of his tenure.” Further he stated “It’s about pragmatism over politics.”

The NDP are now back to making decisions, absent any critical thinking, consultation or knowledge on so many issues. They have reverted back to their Social Engineering agenda on a wide variety of topics which they became well known for a few decades back.

Shortage of Housing? – The centrally controlled Eby administration, took what can only be described as a knee jerk reaction, (I describe their decisions as being brain dead!) to solve the serious housing shortage issue. The community ramifications of their new housing policy in Bills 44, 46 and 47 are so outrageous, I am almost speechless – as I said ALMOST!

In a media interview Eby conducted well before the introduction of these new Bills, after his public comments about what was to come, the media asked – “What about Parking”? His answer was “I am not worried about parking I am only worried about housing”? What world does David Eby live in?

To be clear, Municipal Governments are products of the Provincial Government who have full control over what municipalities can and cannot do through provincial legislation, however I would argue Municipal Governments are the hallmark of our democracy and are much closer to the people. Use a heavy handed and unwarranted hand against them without consultation, discussion and negotiation, an outrageous act, and you will pay the price! Overbearing moves involving the removal of community plans, eliminating zoning, eliminating public hearings on developments, eliminating parking requirements, allowing fourplexes or up to six units on a single-family lot in single family neighborhoods without local input or municipal approval, a one size fits all throughout the province disregarding each municipalities uniqueness, wishes and more, should leave all of us completely outraged and activated going into this year’s election.

The imposition of Bills 44,46, and 47 is the creation of a centralized campaign by Minister Ravi Kahlon and Premier David Eby who haven’t had one day of experience in Municipal elected office or on the issues faced by municipal governments and obviously haven’t spent a second of time considering the investments the public have made in their housing choice. It will not decrease the price of housing, but then why let the facts get in the way of a good story? It will ultimately destroy communities.

Minister Ravi Kahlon quote: Langley Advance Times (Mathew Claxton) – B.C. Housing Minister Ravi Kahlon stated “that doesn’t mean the end of the traditional single-family home just yet.” That statement sure gives you confidence? NOT!

Township of Langley Mayor Eric Woodward quotes: Woodward likened the legislation to “surgery on housing policy using a chainsaw”! A very appropriate comment! “When they take these policies and drop them on the whole province, they’re really ignoring the nuance of how different communities do development differently…. By ignoring that they are going to cause a lot of damage.” “Provincial politicians are not going to prevent me from listening to my community.”

Another very important negative aspect of this legislation is its lack of awareness and recognition of its impact on infrastructure needs. Community infrastructure needs are strategically identified through a provincially mandated process called the “Regional Growth Strategy” (RGS) to serve population and growth numbers agreed to, based on growth projections by the province and determined by their Regional District. (ie Metro Vancouver). All of this goes into identifying the municipalities and regions future needs for police, fire, roads, schools, community amenities, sewer, water, transit and more! As Mayor I was involved in updating our RGS in 2011, I know it well. Now you want to throw all of that out? At who’s expense and under who’s mandate?

Transit-Oriented Areas (TOA) – Through Bill 47 they are creating TOAs forcing municipal governments to force approval of high-rise buildings between eight and 20 stories, minimum within 800 meters of a rapid transit station and within 400 meters of a bus exchange. That imposition is bad enough but it comes with a couple of important facts; there will be no parking requirements being applied to these developments (Meaning NO parking); and there will be no application of the traditional DCCs (Development Cost Charges) nor CACs (Community Amenity Contributions). The removal of the application of municipal costs, which pay for all of those infrastructure costs I previously identified, will cost the Township of Langley (You and I) millions of dollars therefore potentially forcing all existing property taxpayers (You and I) to pay for that shortfall.

“The problem here is that it will take a number of years to realize just how bad these decisions were and then it will be too late.”

The Decriminalization of small amounts of drugs? It cannot be better stated than Andrew Weaver’s statement on this issue – “The decision to decriminalize the use of small amounts of drugs while prescribing “safe” supply narcotics is a philosophy that emphasizes harm reduction at the expense of prevention, treatment and enforcement. Yet when Eby had to ask Health Canada to be able to recriminalize public drug use due to parks and streets being overrun, he blamed the courts rather than his shortsightedness for the course correction.” David Eby’s actions on this issue reflect his imposition of their Social Engineering at all of our expense!

Fiscal Management? Since John Horgan stepped down, the Eby Government has increased spending by 14% and 20% respectively. The debt has tripled since pre-pandemic levels in 2019 – 2020. As a result, two major credit-rating agencies have downgraded B.C. since Eby became Premier which no doubt will increase borrowing costs causing all of us higher taxes.

Solving the transportation crisis on Highway #1? Unfortunately, in what appears to be a deliberate act of public deception by the NDP, the truth is not being told to the public South of the Fraser, regarding the promised widening of highway #1. In what seems to be an endless number of press releases and press conferences, the goal posts continue to change in terms of the various phases of construction, their project start and completion dates, and a few projected phases providing NO dates whatsoever. Completion dates for Highway #1 widening is another 12 years away, just to Sumas Way – Chilliwack, years beyond that! This is just common sense! The South Fraser Community Rail Society have written extensively on this subject, distributing detailed newsletters providing relative facts and figures on this, (our) reality.

Solving the Interregional Public Transit crisis and shortfall South of the Fraser? First to be clear I support the widening of Highway #1 however also to be clear widening Highway #1 WILL NOT solve our public transit crisis regardless of when it is finished. Express buses on a congested highway not going to the destinations riders want does NOT constitute effective public transit.

So here are the facts – Despite John Horgan’s support, his announcement of the study we requested, the government’s labelling of the South Fraser Community Rail Society as a “Key Stakeholder”, the extensive input by the SFCRS into the study at its cost, the very positive outcome of that study – The South of Fraser Community Rail Society was not invited to participate in the “Key Stakeholders” Post-Study Engagement 1 & 2 nor were we ever advised of the conclusion of the study – That was discovered by us about a year and a half AFTER its conclusion via Freedom of Information (FOI). Despite repeated attempts over a full year, requesting a meaningful meeting with Minister Rob Fleming, we were denied after everything we did in support of this government’s efforts at their request and at our cost! A little over $1,000.! It was an act of total disrespect!

Despite the following unequalled, unmatched and unparalleled “Support” for a reactivated Interurban, South of the Fraser – All South of Fraser Municipalities 2009, 88% Public Support (ResearchCo) May 2021 Poll, John Horgan Sept. 2022, ALL Post Secondary Institutions, 2022 UFV Transportation Demand Strategy, June 2023 Township of Langley UBCM Resolution, 2024 Endorsement by the Lower Mainland Local Government Assoc., Surrey Board of Trade, Hydrogen B.C. / Canadian Hydrogen Fuel Cell Assoc., 2023 B.C. Indigenous Housing Society, 2024 Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, 2022 B.C. Government Fraser Valley Regional Rail Pre-Feasibility Study.

The NDP have failed to respond to this priceless, public owned passenger rail opportunity – SkyTrain to Langley City does not cut it, a ridiculous cost! (Again, more on SkyTrain to Langley City in a future post!)

Summary: In my opinion the choice for the next provincial government has been narrowed considerably. I have written with full explanation, in my previous post, why I could not and would never endorse or support Kevin Falcon and B.C. United, in provincial politics the leader is key to any election. The Green Party is clearly of no relevance, that is just a fact. If you want to decide on the future direction of our/your government, that leaves the B.C. Conservative Party. It is important to look at the candidates running to represent you and your family’s values, but again the leader is key to its election. In my up close and personal experience of over 45 years, the MLA report card should be based on – what have they done to make your community stronger. Their job should not be measured on their actions as social butterflies in our communities bouncing from one social get together to another, rather it should be based on meaningful representation. In my opinion there are a number of government MLAs South of the Fraser that are buying into the direction of their party at the expense of their communities – they should be defeated because of their in-action.

In my view the actions of the MLAs for Langley Walnut Grove and Langley Willoughby receive a failing grade! There is no doubt you will hear all about bringing SkyTrain to Langley – Well be careful what you wish for – That real story will be coming in a future post with facts, not hyperbole. Annoyed about the Metro Vancouver out of control spending of your tax dollars, you haven’t seen nothing yet!

RG

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

I am working on future posts that I believe are of significant concern to Township of Langley Residents, come back often for news of interest to Township residents.

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 best predictor of FUTURE BEHAVIOUR is PAST BEHAVIOUR!”

The topic of this BLOG Post is based on my personal experiences with Kevin Falcon when I was Mayor of the Township of Langley. (circa 2008 – 2011) For the Record: I have been a life-long free enterprise supporter going back to 1975, a community activist, party insider, Constituency Executive Member, Provincial Convention Plenary Chairman and candidate, although all of that was during the 70s, 80s, and early 90s. Since that time, in my opinion the free enterprise option has seriously lost its way in our province under the B.C. Liberals aka B.C. United, a lot of things have changed. I have never been able to be a blind loyalist to a given political party if they break from traditional beliefs, “bad government is bad government, on the left or the right.”

In 2017 a group of us had the opportunity to have a two-hour meeting with then candidate John Horgan, NDP Leader – we were very suitably impressed. We found John Horgan far more reasoned and balanced than any NDP Leader we have known, competed against or known since the mid-70s, he just had a good dose of common sense and in our opinion wasn’t drawn to the traditional extreme elements of his party! We supported John and the NDP since that time and have not been sorry for it with so many common-sense actions legislated by his government. Personally I didn’t agree with everything, but on balance he ran a good government, my opinion. Many of my old allies thought I had lost my mind – but then a problem, John Horgan stepped down!

The NDP’s new leader David Eby has been very disappointing – “He is NO John Horgan”. I certainly was willing to give him a chance, but to no avail. The NDP are now back to making decisions, absent any critical thinking, consultation or knowledge on so many issues. They have reverted back to their Social Engineering agenda on a variety of issues. Issues such as removing community plans, zoning and parking requirements with no experience or consultation through Bills 44, 46 and 47; communities as we have known and invested in them will be changed forever. The problem here is that it will take a number of years to realize how bad these decisions were. Their disingenuous press releases regarding highway 1 widening and completion times while ignoring interregional public transit south of the Fraser, short-sighted and poorly thought-out decriminalization of drugs, the revolving door on crime, out of control provincial finances and so much more, it is getting worse.

More on the NDP in a future BLOG Post.  

Back to the very negative issues against Kevin Falcon, which are many but I will outline just a few serious issues that tell me he cannot be trusted in any capacity of leadership.

The Mufford Crescent Diversion (circa 2008 – 2011): In short, this issue stemmed from the Roberts Bank Rail Corridor agreement consisting of 12 funding partners with the purpose to fund 9 overpasses between Roberts Bank and the main rail line South of the Fraser. It was decided by well-known elected political insiders that the Township overpass was to be located at Mufford Crescent over Glover Road. Despite ZERO public consultation, the decision and the very surprising connecting road network was made behind the scenes by those insiders we identify as the Langley Mafia, well connected and involved politically. This was a major issue I ran on during the 2008 election. Despite the then Mayor denying any plan for an overpass we obtained a supporting document confirming our suspicions. After successfully winning that election and before my swearing in, I contacted the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) at which time I had it confirmed that the commissioners were considering this proposal at that moment. I served notice at that time that I would be taking this issue to a series of public open houses and a public meeting to receive public input – despite that notice the ALC gave conditional approval of the proposal shortly after my phone call, not waiting for input from our newly elected Council and input from our community. The above is only the start of our very successful BUT long two-year fight.

The issue with Kevin Falcon? This project’s lead agency was TransLink and their consulting company – Falcon was responsible for TransLink. My opposition to this project without any public consultation was met with derision by then Minister of Transportation Kevin Falcon. Very soon after my swearing in I received an open letter from Minister Falcon “if we didn’t want their funding, they would move the money elsewhere”? Really! No phone call, no conversation, just a threatening letter. On the same issue, after an MFA meeting in his Victoria office the Minister ran after me once again stating a threat to move the money to another project if we didn’t like what they were proposing? Let’s put it this way, it was a very short conversation – a polite version would be “get stuffed”! We would not be threatened – again after two years, we won!

Why did we object to their concocted proposal? They had designed a multi- KM – 4 lane road from Mufford Crescent, cutting the old Hudson’s Bay Farm in half with an overpass over the railway tracks and Glover Road with the road cutting the Bella-Vista Farm in half continuing to 216^th and 64^th – a direction nobody wanted to go connecting to a two-lane country road. In short this would have isolated about 300 acres of farmland that would be very difficult to farm therefore becoming nothing more than a land deal for future development. After close to 2 years, thanks to the then new ALC Chairman Richard Bullock, based on our committee’s minority report’s three major arguments, he voted against the project creating a tie vote therefore defeating the proposal. Kevin Falcon fought us all the way. FYI – The B.C. Liberals removed Richard Bullock from his position shortly after that decision, we retained over 300 acres of prime agricultural land because of his support.

The full and complete story can be read at https://langleywatchdog.com/2013/02/

Financing for the Evergreen Line from TransLink members – During the campaigning for the Evergreen Line in the early 2000s, the regions Councils had campaigned very hard for a lower cost light rail passenger transit option to serve Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam and Port Moody. The region’s TransLink members agreed to a $400 million contribution but had very limited legislative options to raise that kind of money.

Unfortunately, the Provincial Government coopted by the Federal Government then advised all TransLink members that they would build a transit system but it had to be SkyTrain! As is the case on every extension of SkyTrain, the cost ballooned exponentially as budgets exploded and the TransLink members refused to come up with the previously promised funding coupled with the fact operational costs were that much greater. We fought Kevin Falcon on this issue – his answer you can add it to your municipal property tax rolls! Really? We ended up agreeing to an additional 2 cents a litre on gas tax, but did not add an additional expense on property taxes throughout the lower mainland. When Kevin Falcon tells you who he is believe him!       

Truck Parking on Agricultural Land – Quality of Life has always been an intrinsic value, asset and reason for so many to move to, and live in the Township of Langley. 75% of the Township’s land base is locked into the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR), protecting it from residential development. The ALR protects that land from the pressures that come with it, and protection of our quality of life. An issue that started before and during my term as Mayor was what I called the bastardization of the ALR, specifically the non-permitted use of ALR land for a variety of commercial uses, not allowed by provincial legislation BUT the ALC did not have adequate or even minimal enforcement personnel to respond. The ALC always tried to rely on municipal by-law officers who were dealing with pressure from many other areas due to development and staffing pressures.

One of the major issues is the use of ALR land for truck parking which has exponentially got worse over the past decade. We cannot allow these uses in the ALR or we will lose the ALR forever. We have those in society that don’t believe the rules apply to them excusing away the problem with saying there is no place to park their trucks? There is no excuse for breaking the law and there is a process to deal with their problem and issue, USE IT!

Now we have Kevin Falcon arriving in the Township of Langley for a speaking engagement and in an interview with local media stating – “Due to the importance of trucking to the local economy, he would allow truck parking on ALR land”! This was in the response to the Township of Langley taking action against this illegal activity. Really? Unbelievable!      

Changes to the Agricultural Land Reserve – Kevin Falcon during his local Langley media interview stated he would be making changes to the Agricultural Land Reserve! That says it all, and based on my experiences with Kevin Falcon “When Kevin Falcon tells you who he is, believe him!”

A Provincial Government MOT in-house Fraser Valley Transportation Study (Circa 2008 – 2010) In typical Kevin Falcon fashion, he has shown his stripes in favor of BIG Rail (ie CP, CN etc). We all remember the infamous Gordon Campbell / Kevin Falcon Government promise – we will not sell B.C. Rail promise pre-election and then post-election he leased B.C. Rail to CN for 999 years, how insulting! That obvious addiction to support corporate heavy rail over the interests of the public raised its head on another issue in 2009 involving yours truly, so a little history is in order as follows.

In a February 2009 in-camera meeting, as Mayor I had questions regarding the volume of Heavy Rail going through the Langleys and our ability to deal with various rail related issues.

I was advised of a report that our TOL corporate lawyers provided after a 2005 investigation. After viewing that report there were conclusions with an added “subject to what is in the Master Agreement”? Problem – nobody had been able to uncover that Master Agreement? After the meeting and 5 phone calls, I had a copy on my desk the next morning (anonymous). This agreement was between B.C. Hydro and CP Rail, it was a complete previously unknown revelation. A lot has been written about this over the years and I will be providing an update in a future BLOG Post. The key point for this discussion is that the Master Agreement covering the joint section through the Langleys was for 21 years. renewable at either party’s option including the renewal clause. It had to be renewed by August 26^th, 2009. I launched a renewal campaign with all municipalities South of the Fraser, unanimous approval except Chilliwack. I deliberately did not go to the provincial government given their past record of non-support for passenger rail but went directly to then B.C. Hydro CEO Bob Elton – Passenger rights were renewed in June of 2009. Of interest is the fact Bob Elton was removed as B.C. Hydro CEO a few months later? Coincidence, I don’t think so!

I am raising this here due to the past obvious biases of the then B.C. Liberal Government with heavy rail at the expense of the public’s interest and their rights. This was in no way an effort to stifle heavy rail movements but it is and was ensuring that the joint use of the publicly owned and passenger rights protected corridor was sustained. There were very specific commitments made by CP Rail as part of the Freight Rights Sales agreement made in 1988.

It was during this period while campaigning to renew this corridor in meetings with then Mayor of Chilliwack Sharon Gaetz, she stated bizarrely – people don’t leave Chilliwack, we don’t need it? Interesting about 5 years later she publicly stated that it was needed. Pushed by Chilliwack the Provincial Government Ministry of Transportation in-house Fraser Valley Transportation Study (Circa 2008 – 2010) was conducted supported by TransLink and BC Transit (Both agencies controlled by the B.C. Government). In keeping with past self-serving non-educated in-house studies it was produced with pre-determined outcomes. It is interesting to note that the renewal of passenger rights occurred in the early stages of this study, but was not mentioned or considered. Despite the fact this was supposed to be a Fraser Valley Study with Chilliwack participating, it is interesting that all other Fraser Valley Municipalities were excluded and were not asked for input on this study. Kevin Falcon was Minister of Transportation during this period, he is responsible for ignoring the rights of the people of B.C. in favor of his heavy rail friends and insiders in an attempt to squash interest in passenger rail.

NOTE – A NEW 2-part series is coming on the campaign and status to reactivate the publicly owned, passenger protected 99 km Interurban Rail Corridor with State-of-the-art Hydrail Passenger Rail – Go to www.southfrasercommunityrail.com for a view of the proposal.    

In Summary: It should not be surprising to see the B.C. Liberals / BC United doing so badly in the polls. It all stems from their disastrous 16 years in government of which Kevin Falcon was a key part. The public are not stupid, changing the party name without changing what you stand for or cleaning house of old tired personalities who are guilty through participation of the past will not be accepted by the people of B.C.

RG

I am working on a few posts at present that I believe are of significant concern to Township of Langley Residents, 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.

Being elected and serving your community on a Municipal Council is a significant responsibility that brings with it some serious sole searching in the decisions you are tasked to make on behalf of all taxpayers. Whether you run as an independent or as part of a team of like-minded candidates there will always be differences of opinion among all members of Council, (I know, I have been a part of both) however respect and decorum are essential for a well-run Council. Debate and difference of opinion is good and healthy, it is how you deal with it at the Council table with ALL members of Council that is important showing respect for all!

So, to a key question to all members of Council that should be asked – why did you run for Council? For most, in my experience, with the exclusion of many I have had to work with or who I have observed on our Township of Langley Council, normally elected members have priorities on what they want to accomplish? Unfortunately, during the past couple of decades Township of Langley Council has been populated by those being directed by outside forces, I have written about much of this in past BLOG Posts. What has gone on over the last couple of decades in the Township of Langley is hard to imagine or believe, but it is true as I found out.

To the point above, it is called finding your “RELEVANCE” as a sitting member of Council!

The worst situation that a sitting member of Council can find themselves in, is being branded IRRELEVANT! However, that is exactly the position that Councillor Richter finds herself in, it isn’t something that just happened, based on her performance over the last few decades she has been irrelevant for years – in my opinion!

This BLOG Post has been a long time in coming, God knows there has been a considerable amount of material to support my view over the past 16 years, since I first met her. Yes, I know she has been seen by some as the conscience of Council since first being elected in 1999. In reality nothing could be further from the truth if you really follow her actions at the council table. What has she accomplished other than dysfunction?

An opposing view during debate is good, an opposing view for the sake of opposing and being a constant disruptive voice on Council for purely political reasons is quite something else. The well publicized Township of Langley Council dysfunction over a number of years has had a number of contributors and guilty parties; however, there is a “Common Denominator”.

It has been well known that through the tenures of Mayors Kurt Alberts, Rick Green, Jack Froese and now Eric Woodward, Kim Richter has been a very difficult member of council to work with, in the opinion of many. It is not about disagreeing; it is about being disagreeable and disruptive. It is about a non-constructive participant within the body of council!

Why on a long list of issues over the years has she not argued vociferously to reach a final conclusion on an issue that raised her ire; she will ask a question on an issue but never follows up as though the theatrics of asking the question was her only interest in the issue? It is the theatrics of asking a question being her only purpose, she hopes those observing the meeting will think she knows what she is talking about.

A quiet negative vote on council while she is trying to calculate the direction of the political winds on many issues just doesn’t cut it.

Just in my term (2008 – 11) there was the introduction of Community Amenity Contributions (CACs), the Mufford Crescent Diversion, Landfill on Agricultural Land, Athenry, and the Langley Events Center financial boondoggle among so many others. OH yes and there was her appointment to my “Mayors Standing Committee of Finance”, her silence was deafening!

Where was she when we were going through many of those fights? The list is long and significant, I could write this whole BLOG Post on everything pre the 2022 election, but I digress.

So, to the issues immediately at hand, just in the first year of the current council? After watching most if not all Council meetings in the first year of our current council, I cannot sit back any longer without speaking up. Watching her repeatedly ask questions of staff, on many procedural issues that she knows the answers to; after all she has been on council for 23 years. Her posturing to the audience in chambers and on live-stream is nothing more than theatrics designed to try to impress.

First – Constant fight at the Council table as to the current council moving forward on their promises to build the infrastructure long ignored by previous councils which she has been a part of going back a couple of decades!

The current Council majority under Mayor Eric Woodward ran on a platform of not only building the infrastructure, long ignored by previous Councils as they continued to approve development in the Township; he spelled out their plan as to how this investment in infrastructure was going to be paid for; development would finally pay for itself, but no, Kim Richter continues to object.

A big part of this council’s plan was the introduction of a competitive CAC program and an annual review of Development Cost Charges (DCCs). These plans were well presented during the last election and anyone who has been on council as long as Councillor Richter has, knows how that works, only too well. While Kim Richter was only one member of past councils, in 2008 as Mayor I introduced CACs to the Council of the day through a couple of seminars put on by the then Manager of Real Estate Services for the City of Vancouver with respect to their very successful CAC program. A review of my previous BLOG Post tells the story of what has been missed to the detriment of all citizens of the Township of Langley since 2009. She has to take responsibility for not publicly exposing and dealing with the reality of no CACs and the lack of annual updates in the DCC program over so many years.

Her making noise is all about politics, and not about real issues. She has done this consistently since day one. It is all about theatre! In my last BLOG we pointed out that the Township taxpayer has lost out on an estimated $500 million minimum in lost CAC dollars and a $200 million shortfall in DCCs, for a total of approximately $700 million, that bill put on the backs of taxpayers, until now. This was all due to the inaction of past councils of which she was a member.

In one year, our current council has raised an estimated $150 million (with much more to come); on developments that they have approved since taking office, only after their relevant CAC program and updated DCCs were put in place. Those funds will go to pay for the infrastructure that has recently been approved which Kim Richter has voted against, in the majority of cases.

Second – During this year’s wild-fire crisis Municipalities and Cities throughout our province offered up fire-fighting equipment and personnel in an unequalled crisis affecting every area of our province. The Township of Langley did their part by sending a truck and crew to the interior to assist in that fight. In what I consider to be an unbelievable public statement, Councillor Richter, in a Facebook post challenged the Mayor, asking who authorized that contribution? This comment, despite the fact that there was a provincial state of emergency, is incomprehensible; I guess it tells us a lot about the person responsible for making that statement.

Third – Transit in and out of the Gloucester Industrial Park is non-existent; this argument goes back a few decades despite the fact all companies in Gloucester pay a substantial sum of money (In 2011 about $1.6 million annually) to TransLink as a part of their property taxes. To the best of my knowledge, I was the first to bring this issue up as Mayor and member of the TransLink Mayor’s Council (2008 – 11). I set up a meeting in March of 2011 for all companies operating in Gloucester, in the General Motors Board Room. Attending in addition to a large turnout of Gloucester and Aldergrove Businesses were two executives from TransLink, Councillor Richter and local media. The result coming out of that meeting, agreed to by all was that we would do an extensive survey of Gloucester companies and the town of Aldergrove to present to TransLink. To speed up that process I agreed that the Township of Langley would have an extensive survey conducted dealing with our transit deficit. Going back to Council to get approval, one Kim Richter was responsible for arguing against us paying for it, which, given the lack of support I had on Council that initiative died at the council table.

So to today on that issue, which she knows all about only too well, I was shocked to see Councillor Kim Richter opposing a recent motion by the current council to advocate to TransLink and/or the Provincial Government for a transit service or to transfer the currently collected TransLink tax portion of their property tax (now approximately $2.5 million annually) to another agency to provide that service. Imagine paying that amount for a service that you have never received? The motion was passed by Council, thankfully – Councillor Richter opposed.

Summary –

It just doesn’t end! This is not about controlling debate and/or any opposition, it is about how to handle yourself at the council table using common sense and being courteous to all.

When I was elected in 2008 against the odds of many, I arranged to meet with all members of Council for a coffee just to get to know each other before being sworn in. I remember saying at the outset of our individual meetings that they probably didn’t want me to be elected and like-wise with me about them but we are all elected to work in the best interest of our residents. I also remember saying that we can disagree without being disagreeable – Well so much for that effort, it went downhill from there.

All of that being said, it doesn’t take much on council to alienate yourself from the majority, and Councillor Richter continues to lead that parade, something that should embarrass her, but then again it probably does not!   

RG

I am working on a few posts at present that I believe are of significant concern to Township of Langley Residents, 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.

vs the RECENT DARK DECADE and longer! A Brighter Light is now Shining, Elections have consequences good or bad!

A true measurement of a politician or politicians on your municipal council is how are they performing vis a vis the previous council and the platform promises they made. As far as a comparison to the previous council is concerned, a light has been turned on for the public; as far as delivering on their platform promises are concerned, while early (1 year in on a 4-year term) their early performance is a breath of fresh air! Yes, I endorsed Eric Woodward and his team plus Michael Pratt for Council in the last election, have I agreed with all decisions, no, BUT then again that was never going to happen, no matter who got elected which is as it should be! On balance so far, they are doing very well in my opinion.       

I cannot write this post without talking about the Dark Decade and longer that we have just come through, in the Township of Langley!

A brief history – My family moved to the Township of Langley in 1996 after 29 years living in North Delta and owning a large business in Tsawwassen. I spent 22 years heavily invested in politics, elected, and being an activist plus extensive community committee involvement. Our move to Langley was great, buying our property, raising and showing our horses coupled with a promise to my wife that I was done with politics. That promise lasted for about 10 years, BUT after observing a number of issues in the Township, I couldn’t resist, I ran for Mayor, and was elected November 15^th, 2008. Be careful what you wish for, what I knew before getting elected, paled in comparison to what I found after being sworn in.

The issues were extremely significant back then, in short, the Township of Langley had been run, and controlled by friends and insiders of those in elected office over many many years. Those involved during this period of time were known quietly by many of us as the Langley Mafia.  Dispute that? There was just too much evidence on what was really going on, as I have written in this BLOG.

This BLOG was initiated back in January of 2013, after giving then Mayor Jack Froese one year to prove his worth. He failed in spades with a continuing do nothing, see nothing, say nothing administration, the same as what went on before my term. A review of over 150 posts in this BLOG’s history deals with a multitude of Township of Langley issues over the last 10 years. Frankly if it wasn’t so serious it would be a joke. I still ask myself how any of this was possible?

So why do I say the “Dark Decade”?

In 2008 it was apparent that the Township of Langley was facing an explosion in population, due to so much available and developable land in a municipality within Metro Vancouver, specifically Willoughby. In 2008 the Township of Langley had a population of about 107,000 with the actual Willoughby population in the 17,000 range. It was the focus of numerous community planning initiatives and development applications back then, but that was just the start. It has been supercharged ever since. It was, and in some ways still is the wild west in property development!

The Problem? – It is one thing to approve a development, but it is quite something else to deal up front with the planning necessary to include, who is going to pay for the community infrastructure necessary to support the incoming population? To be clear, development does not pay for itself, it never has. By way of the old Municipal Act and the relatively NEW Community Charter, developers are required to pay for DCCs (Development Cost Charges). DCC assessments are approved by council designed to fund localized sewer, water, road, sidewalk and lighting infrastructure. They can only be used for limited purposes per its provincial legislation. It is common sense that DCC rates should be increased annually, due to inflation, if nothing else, however this was not being done on an annual basis in the Township.

Checking on DCC increases by the Jack Froese government? They didn’t raise DCCs between 2012 and 2020 – An estimate of lost dollars – $200 million. You the taxpayer paid that bill!

All of this meant that when the time came for the Township to contract and put in the infrastructure the money was secured to pay for, the municipality was spending money year(s) after at an inflated rate due to cost increases over that period of time. Therefore, you were having to spend more money than what was collected from the developers to provide the infrastructure that was planned. You the taxpayer ended up paying for the shortfall. It was wrong but had been allowed to continue. That thinking has ended with our new council.

So, who was the previous council thinking was going to pay for all of the supporting infrastructure? First of all, by all accounts they didn’t have a plan at all. Fire Halls their infrastructure plus staffing, Police Offices their infrastructure plus staffing, Community Centers, Pools, Dry Floor arenas, Ice Arenas, State-of-the-art active parks, passive parks, Fields, pre-development major road infrastructure like 208^th Street and so much more?

You The taxpayer have been paying for the shortfall!!!!

There are only two choices as to who will pay for the supporting infrastructure that is required to support the population that moves into all of that council approved development, you the taxpayer OR the developer! Well, it was a massive failure by past councils; that cost inevitably landed on the back of Township of Langley taxpayers to the benefit of developers. Past administrations in the Township of Langley had very tight connections to the development community.

In 2009 I presented my council with a solution to this significant problem as I saw it – Community Amenity Contributions (CACs) but they didn’t see it my way, why? It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that one out!

Recognizing this problem among many, I made CACs (Community Amenity Contributions) an issue during my campaign of 2008. After the election I brought in Bruce Maitland a well- respected retired Manager of the City of Vancouver Real Estate Services who was very well versed on the CAC issue. Bruce and his wife live in the Willoughby community.

His primary task at the time was to conduct a seminar for all Council members to understand the Vancouver CAC program (Vancouver originated the idea which had been court tested) to explain in detail what was involved and why it was such a benefit. Well, NOT for my council!

I will never forget the action of one councillor, who is still on Council I might add (3 guesses and the first two don’t count – LOL). That individual stood up in the middle of the seminar and blurted out – that is fine for Vancouver, but we don’t do that in the Township of Langley! The stupidity of such a statement is mind boggling! So why did the council of the day reject such an idea – one can only assume that friendship with the development community meant more than the impact on you the residential and business taxpayer.

So, what was the impact of that decision by the 2008 – 2011 Council and the intransigence of Jack Froese and his Council over the past 10 years to continue with such an irresponsible anti CAC policy? NOTE – His council brought in a relatively insignificant CAC by-law in 2018 (very low by any comparative standards to surrounding municipalities) which didn’t take effect until sometime in 2019 with a few small payments made late in 2019.

So, what was the cost of rejecting such a valuable development by-law opportunity in 2009? Think of all of the residential and business development that has taken place in the Township of Langley over the past 14 years? Think of the development just in Willoughby alone? So, what are the numbers? I have watched council quite closely since their swearing in last year. I have tracked their move and implementation of a competitive CAC by-law and their actions with development applications including those that were able to be brought back to review by the new council.

Prior to the current council’s election, Willoughby has had about 40% development approved virtually no or very limited return to the Township of Langley via the old CAC program. So, to be clear 40% or more of Willoughby has been allowed to be developed without contributing a single dime towards the current and justified campaign to bring our communities up to a safe, livable and enjoyable community standard. Willoughby’s population is now over 50,000 probably half way to its built-out number.

What has been achieved by the new council should make all of us very pleased that we have the majority on council who have a vision on what has been needed and how to pay for it. There will be borrowing – however amendments have been made to the CAC program to be able to pay off certain debt when the monies are collected from approved developments.

It is estimated that this council has generated, in less than one year, about $150 Million in CACs. This is a small amount of what will be coming to the Township through CACs as the Willoughby area is built out not counting development in other parts of the Township of Langley. Now, that money has not all been collected yet, which is why there has been the need for borrowing against dedicated CAC revenue payable to the Township of Langley. Some of the improvements like the widening of 208^th street will be funded through borrowing against future DCCs coming from property development on both sides of 208^th Street.

How much have we allowed to slip through our fingers through the inaction of numerous previous councils since 2008?

How about a minimum of $500 million in lost dollars?

Add to that a $200 million shortfall in DCCs you get a $700 million bill to taxpayers.

Think of what that that money could have been used for?

Call me a liar, but it would probably be greater than the amount above!

A big thank you to the Township of Langley majority on Council for their vision and pro-active decisions. There is no question that this council has had to play catch up due to the irresponsible series of municipal governments that we have had in the Township of Langley. The necessary decisions are finally being made through a responsible developer paid funding initiative for the necessary and essential community amenities for safety, recreation and livability.

PS – I say the majority on council because there is certainly a long term exception to that on council, I will deal with that issue in a future post.

RG

I am working on a few posts at present that I believe are of significant concern to Township of Langley Residents, 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.

So the Langley Advance headlines read – 7.29% tax hike suggested by staff, Council calling for a tax increase of 4%! As somebody who has been there, nothing has changed! Staff, for the most part create the process that will best justify their wishes, control of the process, and the result. All of this brings me back to my first budget process after my election as Mayor of the Township of Langley in November of 2008 – an eye opening experience, one that you had to see to believe! My implementation of a “Mayor’s Standing Committee of Finance” faced the focus of staff behind the scenes with undue influence and obstruction and the then Municipal Council’s public outrage to the Standing Committees creation. I had appointed the then retired managing Director of BDO Dunwoody, a just retired Federal tax auditor and a local lawyer (all volunteers) and three Council members to the committee. This committee was set up per the Mayor’s authority under the guidelines of the Community Charter. We learned a lot about the facts behind Municipal budgeting through this process and what really goes on.

Some History from my term as Mayor – The Council of the day decided, because they strongly objected to the creation of a “Mayor’s Standing Committee of Finance”, that they would NOT participate in any budget discussions and would leave it to the Standing Committee to submit a report to Council. For the record all members of Council were invited to attend the Standing Committee meetings, but to no avail. We were very open in looking at Zero based budgeting to which Mark Bakken, our CAO noted in one of our first meetings “we practice a form of Zero based budgeting”! Message to Mark Bakken at the time – there is no such thing, it is Zero based OR it is NOT.

After about 3 ½ months of long, very frequent and very involved detailed budget discussion meetings with committee members, staff, and department heads – a department by department, line by line analysis of the provisional budget proposed by staff occurred. I have been lead to believe this kind of analysis had never been undertaken before by and/or for any previous Council and you can bet it hasn’t happened since. A final report was then presented to Council.

The result – A Standing Committee of Finance Report was submitted. It was lengthy but in the final analysis, fully explained it recommended a tax increase of 1%. In a motion put forward by Councillor Bateman immediately after the committees presentation (same meeting) ignored the Standing Committee’s report, not a question asked, and moved a motion for a tax increase of 5% – which was immediately approved by council.

To today’s news on budget discussions – per the Director of Finance public comments “they need to find $5 million in savings, spending reductions or increased revenue”. Or Mark Bakken’s (TOL CAO) comments “We likely have a lot more priorities or hopes than we may have resources” or “Council may have to prioritize or look for creative ways of raising revenue and reducing expenses”!

Excuse me but as that old saying goes “Bull Shit is trying to Baffle Brains”!

Have we not forgotten something here, a number of items staff never want to talk about? Our committee went line by line with every department head reviewing every category and sub-category of which there are many within a complete Municipal Budget.

Township of Langley Capital Budget – There are numerous headings used by staff; just a few examples – “Capital Budget approved not funded”, “Capital budget approved and started” or “Capital Budget approved, funded, not started”! 

Just in one area we uncovered something very interesting, a category that at first glance seems insignificant probably significantly inflated from what it was back in 2009 in every department! That is in the Category – “Capital Projects approved, funded, not started”! We found that throughout the budget this category was nothing but a catch all for taxpayer funds, put another way, slush funds. This was a catch-all for a wide variety of projects over the years that had been approved by the Council of the day, those major or minor that had been delayed, forgotten about, lacked any urgency to conclude and/or those put on hold for one reason or another. Probably in some cases they were a ruse! This appeared to have been going on for years unchecked. A normal process would be if these funds were not expended and project started within a year, those funds should revert to general revenue. If you extrapolate this practice over many years you are talking a significant number of financial slush funds throughout the budget that are being protected and carried forward year after year after year.

Township of Langley Operations Budget – So Township / Municipal Staff led by their CAO seem to feel it is their rite of passage and they are above being questioned as to line items in the budget dealing with regular activities and costs. God forbid if we can achieve better results by implementing new and more productive methods to achieve the same or in many cases better results throughout our Township service model at a lower cost? Number of vehicles requested vs need? I am not suggesting that government services (public sector) can be operated the same as or with the same efficiency as the private sector (for a wide variety of reasons), however there has to be a willingness on the part of public sector management to do better and be more accountable.

As to public sector wages – by any measure they are the best by any comparison to the private sector and are a product of agreements negotiated on behalf of the Public Sector in Metro Vancouver by RES (Regional Employers Services). That’s right, public sector employees negotiating for public sector employees. Fact, the negotiators will receive the same or better increase than those they are negotiating for. After all it is only your tax dollars they are spending! Not all municipalities take advantage of these services but their negotiated settlements form a template throughout the region. A number of years ago as a Delta Alderman I served on the then Metro Vancouver labor relations Committee. The only thing that has changed is it has been expedited.

Summary: We sincerely wish our new council well in their efforts in concluding a municipal budget with a tax increase of 4% which is their publicly stated goal. The majority of this council were elected on a very well thought out plan that will start the Township on a road to delivering on the services, facilities and roads required for such a dramatically fast growing Municipality. It certainly can be done it just requires determination and focus to cut through all of the internal noise and obstruction.

RG

I am working on a few posts at present that I believe are of significant concern to Township of Langley Residents, 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.

Our Year End Message: Well, it has been a full and very interesting year in politics in the Township of Langley. In 2022 we took a very active role in the 2022 Municipal Election reporting on and being very straight forward on our opinion on issues and individuals as most of you will know and recognize. We ultimately took the position we did in support of Eric Woodward and his “Contract with Langley Team” based on his straight-forward talk dealing with issues of concern to everyone complete with how he was going to achieve a successful conclusion. I believe the election results – 6 of 7 elected to Council and 3 of 3 elected to School Board is proof of the public’s support. Those results speak volumes to community support, all regions, and all polls. With those campaign promises comes community pressure to deliver. They have the majority and they have the mandate – it is now time to deliver! By the way, they have made a great start!

We at www.langleywatchdog.com are gearing up for a very active year in 2023, preparing a number of featured BLOG Posts on issues, Breaking News and information. All of this focused on what will seriously affect residents of the Township of Langley, primarily at the Provincial and Municipal levels. Provincially, we have a NEW premier in David Eby.

Municipally we have numerous Township of Langley issues plus Metro Vancouver’s regional issues that including Transportation that unfortunately residents are just are not but should be aware of. There is so much material and information that is just not getting into the Public’s hands; we will keep our readers informed. What is really happening behind the scenes, check us out starting again the first week of January 2023, tune into  www.langleywatchdog.com .

Over 150,000 views to-date! Feel free to contact me at any time by email, Facebook or by phone. All contact information is available on our BLOG and ALL contact is guaranteed to be confidential!

On behalf of www.langleywatchdog.com we want to wish all of our readers a very Merry Christmas and a Healthy, Happy and Prosperous New Year. See you in January 2023!

RG

I am working on a few posts at present that I believe should be of significant concern and interest to residents of the Township of Langley.

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

Share this BLOG; FORWARD THIS POST TO YOUR FRIENDS, NEIGHBORS AND RELATIVES!

  The election campaign is over, so it is now time for our NEW Township of Langley Municipal Council to put their money where their mouth is. My observation of their first council business meeting sent a strong message that they are doing just that, what a refreshing start!

Their published agenda was long and it contained many items that will be of serious public interest dealing with many of the “Contract with Langley” election commitments and promises. The most relevant and obvious observation, beyond the issues that they dealt with, was the decorum among members of council, the attitude of all members of council that were present towards each other, and in a couple of cases to disagree without being disagreeable.

It was interesting that Councillor Kim Richter was absent from the first regular meeting and yet attended the evenings Public Hearing. No reason was given?

The benefits of having a majority on council were clearly on display, however with that majority comes a very real responsibility on the part of the meeting chair, Mayor Eric Woodward. The meeting was very well chaired displaying a humble willingness to ensure they were not going to be overpowering but were inclusive for comment by all members as well as through a well laid out series of “Notices of Motions”. A special shout out to independent Councillors Margaret Kunst and Michael Pratt for their professional  participation expressing their views in what might seem to be a challenging new environment. This meeting shows it can work well. All in all it was a great start; the first meeting of a four-year term and “Contract with Langley”!

I have no problem saying, which I have done recently; the campaign put together by the Contract with Langley team was the best I have seen in over 40 years of being involved in politics. They clearly laid out the issues; they laid out their platform, all the while incorporating their plan of how they were going to pay for their promises. Their presentation was extensive with simple but well put together graphics in signage, print, extensive social media messaging including numerous videos, partnership / endorsement support of community sport groups plus numerous community town hall events. The underlying key feature of everything they were promising, was their need to elect a majority of their team to be able to deliver on their promised platform. They now have their majority, they now have their mandate – now it is time for them to deliver, and it is up to them.

Elections are often treated with a healthy dose of skepticism by the general public in terms of delivering on election promises. Aside from the normal agenda items for 1^st and 2^nd readings, 1^st, 2^nd, and 3^rd readings, 3^rd readings and correspondence items, the following is an abbreviated recap of some key steps this council took in their first meeting to obviously meet the expectations they set through the promises they made. It speaks volumes to their commitment to deliver:

Notice of Motion from Councillor Rindt regarding the Agricultural Land Reserve: Of significant importance was a Notice of Motion on the 93 acre Bucci Developments property at the corner of 64^th / Mufford and 208^th, serving notice that the Township of Langley WILL NOT support any exclusion application to the ALC of this property. It is “contrary to the public interest due to the quality, location, and Council’s preference to retain agricultural land within the Township of Langley”. This was unanimously supported. NOTE: This property is part of the historical Hudsons Bay Farm that the B.C. Liberal Government, through TransLink in 2009, attempted to run the Mufford Crescent Diversion through the middle of, diverting all traffic over to the corner of 216^th and 64^th. While it took an extensive two year fight against all of the major players including our Council, our Community Minority Report to the ALC finally won out when I was the Mayor.

Notice of Motion from Mayor Woodward for the Reconsideration of the Conwest Gloucester Application: Primary goal is for the reconsideration and further discussion regarding the Community Amenity Contributions (CACs) for the benefit of the Township of Langley. Majority supported, Councillor Kunst opposed.

Notice of Motion from Mayor Woodward for the Reconsideration of the Qualico Mitchell Williams LLP Application Development Permit No. 101029: Primary goal is for the reconsideration and further discussion surrounding density, road networks and Community Amenity Contributions (CACs) for the benefit of the Township of Langley. Majority supported, Councillor Kunst opposed.

Notice of Motion from Mayor Woodward for the Reconsideration of the Qualico Mitchell Williams LLP Application Development Permit No. 101027 and 101213: Primary goal is for the reconsideration and further discussion surrounding density, road networks and Community Amenity Contributions (CACs) for the benefit of the Township of Langley. Majority supported, Councillor Kunst opposed.

Notice of Motion from Mayor Woodward for a Community Amenity Contributions Policy Update: A very detailed explanation to staff directing staff to prepare an update to Council’s CAC policy based on the detailed explanation outlined. Included was a priority list of the community amenities to be included. This was unanimously supported.

Notice of Motion from Mayor Woodward – Direction to staff for NEW Community and Planning Priorities: A very detailed request to staff for CAC update, complete review and update of neighborhood plans within Willoughby, consolidation of Greenway amenity policies, complete Booth, Rinn and Fernridge neighborhood plans, complete and update Williams Neighborhood Plan, complete and update Smith Neighborhood Plan, and disband the Willowbrook Planning Team to provide a wider spectrum of public input. This was unanimously supported.

Notice of Motion from Mayor Woodward for Willoughby Arterial Road Community Amenity Program (WARCAP) Consolidation with Road DCCs: A direction to staff dealing with a process to update DCC charges and the consolidation of such to advance the need for the promised update to Willoughby Arterial Road improvements. (Example 208^th and 80^th among others) This was unanimously supported.

Notice of Motion from Councillors Pratt and vanPopta regarding a Final resolution of North Langley Water Issues: A detailed motion directing staff to report back to council a process to cease the use of well water in Fort Langley and implement the service of Metro Vancouver water to this area as soon as possible. This was unanimously supported.

Notice of Motion from Councillor Baillie to add 40 full time firefighters 2023 – 2028: Due to the extensive growth within the Township of Langley and the current understaffing of full time firefighters staff are directed to incorporate the costs of 40 full time firefighters spread over a 5 year time span. This was unanimously supported.

Notice of Motion from Mayor Woodward requesting review of Salmon River Uplands Rural Community Plan: That Council considers any residential subdivision in the Salmon River Uplands area to be contrary to the public interest if subdivided under current minimum parcel sizes and before Council addresses minimum parcel sizes in relation to the review. This was unanimously supported.

Notice of Motion from Mayor Woodward for the initiation of Priority Project Works with initial Preparations: That staff initiate the planning for 1) a NEW Indoor Pool and Community Center within Yorkson Community Park in Willoughby 2) A NEW Soccer Campus within Smith Neighborhood Plan in Willoughby and 3) A NEW Ice and Dry Floor recreation facility at the Langley Events Center in Willoughby. This was unanimously supported.  

Notice of Motion from Councillor vanPopta for Council Consideration of project 08-26-0225 (45 Story Vesta Tower) at 80^th and 200^th Street: In a very detailed notice of motion and reasons for it that Council advise staff to communicate with Vesta Properties in writing that they will not consider (they will deny) the planned 45 story high-rise at this location directing them to complete their previously approved planned community consisting of low rise condominiums and townhouses. This was unanimously supported.

Full Disclosure, I fully support the foregoing initiatives however while I understand the sentiment I totally disagree with the following Notice of Motion and explain why. I am sure many will disagree with my conclusion but think about someone new wanting to run?

Notice of Motion from Councillor Baillie – Election signs to be restricted to Private Property: Direction to staff to bring forward an amendment to the Election and Political Signs by-law prohibiting any and all election signage on Township property.

Editorial opinion – As a political activist, candidate, elected and campaign manager for over 45 years, municipal, provincial and federal, I hate election signs with a passion and more than anyone, however democracy has a price and comes at a cost. It is increasingly difficult for non-incumbents to raise their profile during an election campaign. We are now running elections every 4 years, less frequent elections bring less opportunity to raise community profile. Many will remember our elections were every 2 years. Our new campaign financing laws place further restrictions on anyone interested in running. Three weeks of looking at unsightly election signs, every 4 years is a small price to pay for our democratic process. I would also suggest it is somewhat a conflict-of-interest for an elected Municipal Council to place restrictions on future candidates vying for their jobs. I remember a comment made about damage and theft as a problem – I know that problem better than anyone, it is a fact of life and it is still no excuse to impose these restrictions on future candidates. I would hope that Council will reconsider this move or at the very least have staff prepare a report on election signage policies of surrounding municipalities.    

Summary

As is clearly identified in their first agenda, this Council appears to not only want to change how things are done but are determined to move quickly in their efforts, I applaud them for that. It strikes me that this is only the start of implementing the changes the Township of Langley has been looking for, for over two decades. They have to use their majority wisely and if my experience on a Council as part of a slate means anything, there will be conflicts and disagreements – that is healthy. Again you can disagree without being disagreeable!

As I see it, while this is only the first meeting, a lot of hope lies with the residents of the Township of Langley that we are entering a new age that is not controlled by back room lobbyists. It is a great move forward. I will be reporting on the activity and progress of this council on a regular basis over the next four years.   

RG

More interesting 2022 Municipal Election News coming soon!

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.

In what can only be described as a very dirty and distasteful election campaign initiated by a few individuals with deep personal hatred issues, the targets of that hatred took the high road and won! A review of poll by poll results speaks volumes in support of the wishes of Township of Langley residents wanting good transparent government to get things done! 

We have seen how a series of FOUR year terms, has affected our growing municipality. Depending on which numbers you want to look at, our population has increased by about 40,000 people in ten years or 5,000 per year, or about 20,000 during one FOUR year term. Losing the capacity or will to improve the necessary infrastructure year after year on the heels of approving a massive increase in development – well, have seen the result.

The sad reality is our municipality has been, up to now, run by power brokers and self-interested individuals with insider connections, unbeknown to innocent tax payers. I found out about the real corruption going on in the Township of Langley as Mayor with nobody on council willing to support the need for change. With no support for the change we needed back then, we have what we have today.

Nobody can say there wasn’t a clear choice in this year’s election. The Whitmarsh, Coleman, and Sparrow campaigns were effectively campaigning to keep the status quo – and from my perspective their campaigns were very poor by any effective campaign standards. On the Coleman campaign, I was waiting for another shoe to drop, and it never came. Given Rich Coleman’s political experience I couldn’t believe they ran such a poor and ineffective campaign – from messaging to signage to design and graphics it left one wondering what was this was all about? What did they plan to achieve?

In my 45 years of experience, the Contract with Langley campaign was outstanding. Everything from the volume of Social Media, to Print Media, to graphics, their messaging and their platform, all with an excellent presentation. From on-line videos featuring Eric Woodward and each of the team’s candidates, to endorsements by user groups, to live streaming community Town Halls, to on-site videos of their community initiatives in their platform, as well as speaking directly to residents of the Township of Langley. Most important they answered all of the obvious questions in a very public way. So to their incredibly successful results:

Eric Woodward topped all polls except one.

Contract with Langley Councillors filled 5 of the top 6 spots on Council.

Contract with Langley candidate Barb Martens topped the polls in her first try.

Despite a clique of angry Fort Langley residents Eric Woodward topped the Fort Langley Poll.

Despite a clique of angry Fort Langley residents Contract with Langley candidates did very well in the Fort Langley Poll.

Contract with Langley candidates became the first slate / team to get elected in the Township in over 20 years!

All three Contract with Langley School Board candidates won a spot on School Board.

2 of the 3 Contract with Langley School Board Candidates topped the polls.

So now what, where do we go from here?

Contract with Langley ran a great campaign, and obviously based on my BLOG Posts and endorsements we supported their team plus two independents. (7 of 9 that we endorsed won in the election) So now the pressure is on; they have the mandate they wanted, they have the mandate they needed to get things done. They know what they have to do now to deliver on their campaign promises, the residents of the Township will be watching, there are no excuses. I argued in favor of their team, knowing what is necessary for a Council to move our community forward. It is their time to show they deserved our trust.

This election stands to be the most transformative election in our history, and that is not hyperbole!  

What about Voter Turnout throughout the Lower Mainland? It is shocking!

As we have repeatedly warned our readers, elections have consequences. Reviewing the election results throughout the Lower Mainland sends a very concerning message. As we know, Municipal election turnout has not been great over many elections. Having said that as you can see below, 22 Municipalities / Cities reflect a decline in voter turnout, some greater than others. In one City close to home, it has hit rock bottom which doesn’t say much about the newly elected Mayor and Council.

What can be done about the low turnout in Municipal elections? Have we reached the point that there should be a penalty for not voting or conversely a bonus / credit for voting?

I am sure most people have heard that your Municipal / City government have the singular biggest effect on your families daily lives. When you analyze voter turnout numbers there can be a number of qualifications or reasons that align with any respective turnout number. Obviously a Mayoral contest raises the interest, the number of candidates (especially for Mayor) raises the interest, and high-profile local issues raises the interest, but despite all of that it doesn’t alter the question – Why are our Municipal elections drawing such little interest? There are some interesting conclusions that can be drawn, especially one close to home.

Here is a list of 22 Municipalities and Cities throughout the Lower Mainland, all showing a decrease in voter turnout vs 2018 of eligible voters, some more than others:

Belcarra – 74.6% turnout – down 10.1%      

Anmore – 50.8% turnout – down 1.2% 

Vancouver – 36% turnout – down 3.1%

West Vancouver – 35% turnout – down 2.7%

City of Surrey – 34% turnout – down 1.6%

Port Moody – 31% turnout – down 5.9%

City of White Rock – 29.4% turnout – down 10.2%

City of Delta – 28.5% turnout – down – 14.3%

City of New Westminster – 27.3% turnout – down .02%

Township of Langley – 26.5% turnout – down 3.9%

City of Richmond – 24.5% turnout – down 12%

City of Abbotsford – 23.6% turnout – down 12.3%

District of North Vancouver – 23.5% turnout – down 13.!%

Pitt Meadows – 23.3 % turnout – down 16.9%

City of Chilliwack – 24.7% turnout – down 14.3%

City of North Vancouver – 22.4% turnout – down 11.4%

City of Mission – 21.9% turnout – down 9.8%

City of Maple Ridge – 21.5% turnout – down 12%

City of Coquitlam – 20.1% turnout – down 5.2%                      

City of Burnaby – 19.3 % turnout – down 12.7%

Port Coquitlam – 18.3% turnout – down 9.8%

City of Langley – 17% turnout – down 8.2%

NOTE: City of Langley: A number of conclusions / opinions can be drawn from these election results. Yes, you can say a win is a win – however those that disregard the reality of election voter turnout, does so at their peril. Looking at the City of Langley turnout numbers, it screams “None of the Above”!

A reality check for the City of Langley – Think about it – 22,166 eligible voters and you win with 2,434 votes and your opposition receives 1,290 votes. Put it another way 1 in 6 eligible voters cast their ballot – or 1 in over 9 voters who cast their ballot did so for the winner, that is nothing short of embarrassing! If I was the elected Mayor I would be alarmed!

Summary: Elections have Consequences! Remember we are electing our councils for FOUR years in today’s world which can be very impactful, either negative or positive? From my observation our elections have taken on a different impact which has yet to be realized by the public.

 RG

More interesting 2022 Municipal Election News coming soon!

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