langleywatchdog…. and more!

Public Hearings are an integral part of Municipal Governance, unfortunately all too often politicians treat this requirement with disdain and pay lip service to those who take the time to appear before council or sign petitions. And we wonder WHY taxpayers are jaded with their elected representatives!

The problem? Many elected politicians think they were elected because they are smarter than those that elected them? NEWSFLASH – NO , we elect representatives, NOT dictators. It’s called democracy! 

Last week Surrey Municipal Council was the latest victim of Provincial Government Political Interference (Minister Rich Coleman’s phone calls to Council members during a Public Hearing process); Congratulations to Mayor Watts for standing up for her community, voting against the Casino! Rich Coleman as of February 1^st claims he did no wrong? Well, what can I say, he just doesn’t get it! One has to ask the question, why is the BC Lottery Commission and it’s Minister so involved in this project; it should be the DEVELOPER who leads and wears the process. Rich Coleman as Minister of the Crown is the REGULATOR; he has absolutely no business being involved. – Could there be another reason? I don’t know, I am just asking?

I want to congratulate Mayor Watts for doing what she felt was right in casting a vote against the Casino development in South Surrey. It had to be a very tough decision, on one hand it would mean considerable revenue for Surrey but very easy on the other hand, she is listening to the voters of Surrey. I am not speaking for or against the Casino – I am saluting Dianne for having the guts to make THE very difficult decision.

Rich Coleman – I know this is hard for you to understand because you have never let it to get in the way before, (HST, Smart Meters to name a few) but it is called DEMOCRACY, the people’s right to be heard! This is what the Public Hearing Process is all about, god forbid we have to explain that (democracy) to those at the Provincial level.

Traditional Public Hearing / B.C. Community Charter – For the record; the process for a traditional development to proceed under the B.C. Community Charter requires the Municipality to formulate a by-law and for that by-law to receive 1^st and 2^nd reading by a Municipal Council majority before it can go to a Public Hearing. Receiving 1^st and 2^nd reading, it then must be advertised in the local paper, circulation of a notice to the immediate area in addition to signage being posted on the affected property with the necessary detail about the project prior to the upcoming Public Hearing. Council members can receive public input before and during the Public Hearing either by personal verbal and/or written presentation, but they cannot receive input in anyway after the termination of the Public Hearing until third reading (approval in principle or rejection) is voted on and dealt with by Council.

Other Consultation – There are other Public Consultation forums offered by some municipalities, public council delegations and/or public meetings among them. As a politician, if you are going to take the opportunity to ask the public’s opinion either mandated or optional, then I get the sense more than ever in today’s world (the way it should be) you had better start to listen and hear, otherwise you WILL pay the price. For those in the Provincial Government (B.C. Liberals) who do not seek public input and consultation, listen or hear (HST, Smart Meters, B.C. Rail among so many other issues) there is no question you WILL pay the price!

A few Interesting examples out of recent and past History –

Spetifore / Southlands (Public Hearing) – Tsawwassen – In 1987 I was elected Alderman in the Municipality of Delta. During this term, we faced the electorate over a proposed development by-law to designate the approximate 800 acres of Spetifore Lands in South Delta Urban. These lands go back to a controversial Social Credit Cabinet “Order in Council” withdrawing  these lands from the ALR. The Spetifore family were very long standing supporters of Social Credit. At the time I was Vice President of the Delta Social Credit Constituency Association with over 2,200 members (I was in the crosshairs of opponents). We supported 1^st and 2^nd reading and went into the Public Hearing process which still holds the Canadian record for Public Hearings – 108 hours – the proposal was denied unanimously – I moved the motion to deny 3^rd reading! It is called listening to the public even though throughout the process we worked with the proponent to present what we thought would be a good option to be considered by the public. As a Council we did not have or feel any obligation to the proponent to support the proposal at the end of the Public Hearing process, absolutely not. Was the proponent disappointed, absolutely, but that is the process and they knew it. By the way, our very pro free enterprise council did not receive any bullying or threats by the then Social Credit Government or anyone else.

Mufford Crescent Diversion (Public Meeting / Open Houses) – Langley – In 2008 one of many reasons I ran for the Mayor’s office was the secret planning and development of the Mufford Crescent Diversion which was going to funnel 500 cars an hour onto 64^th at 216^th, unknown to anyone until we discovered what was happening and notified property owners east of 216^th Street. No public consultation, not even notification or advice! I promised during the election that I would bring this back for public consultation. Two Open Houses and a Public Meeting later that saw over 1,000 people involved with at least a 95% opposition, the Council of the day voted on two occasions 6 – 3 in favor of the project. (Given the incident in Surrey with Rich Coleman contacting members of Council, is there any chance he contacted members of our Council prior to our vote? Not accusing anyone, just asking the question?) Three weeks into my term as Mayor I received a very public letter from Kevin Falcon the then Minister of Transportation with an ultimatum, this is the only plan they will consider otherwise they will withdraw their funds and move the funds to another Municipality. My answer was, don’t threaten us we will not be intimidated. (Provincial Government Political Interference – sound familiar?) Despite Council votes in favor, the ALC rejected this planned route seeing serious flaws in the proponents written presentation. (A full post on this issue at a later date)

Athenry Development / Willoughby (Development Permit Public Hearing) – During the week of Nov. 22^nd, 2010 I became aware of an agenda item (Athenry Developments) scheduled for a “Development Permit” Public Hearing on Monday November 29^th, 2010 which had received 1^st and 2^nd reading, public hearing and 3^rd reading (conditional approval) in June of 2008 prior to my election as Mayor. In doing my due diligence in preparation for the upcoming Public Hearing I researched this project and it’s history, through a variety of Staff Reports. I was frankly shocked in finding the project that was proposed and given the appropriate readings, including Public Hearing bared no resemblance in my opinion to what was before us at Development Permit Stage and 4^th and final reading. Changes can only be made after 3^rd reading in Form, Character and Design. These changes in my opinion did not qualify!.

The original June 2008 approved project was for one building located roughly in the center of the property while the 2010 version was for three, four story apartment buildings, a two story office building and a Cultural Center. This change impacted all surrounding private homes severely with a dramatically reduced set back, increased height of buildings and close imposition immediately next to surrounding homes. In my opinion and experience this was and is a travesty that happened to local hard working taxpayers. (NOTE – As I understand it, the affected residents had launched legal action but withdrew without giving up their right for taking action in the future.) Due to their position they have been denied access to speak to directly to councilors (They must go through Township lawyers) about ongoing problems with the development that has so dramatically affected their quality of life and home values!

For any residents reading this and wondering what their reaction might be IF they were in the same position, I can assure you, anyone with a pulse would be marching on the Municipal Hall. It is an absolute outrage! (A Full Post on this issue at a later date)

Township of Langley Public Hearing / Consultation process – 

The Township of Langley has over a long period of time created a culture of ignoring public input, either in Public Hearings or Meetings. While in office I encouraged public debate, dialogue (Monthly Mayor’s informal forums) and community involvement, much to the chagrin of members of Council. The planned 208^th St. Truck Route making it part of the Translink MRN (Major Road Network) is a case in point. I encouraged residents, IF they did not want that to happen to involve the community! They took up my challenge – Involve the community they did, a 2,200 name petition and 700 resident turnout to an Open House at the LEC will do it every time. Show me a community that doesn’t stand up for each other and fight for what they want and I will show you a community that is dying!

You have to look at the record of the majority of the current members of council, ask yourself just who are they working for and who are they looking after? Aside from the issues I talked about earlier, consider:

• The infamous condominium wall at Bedford Landing in Fort Langley, among a number of problems adding a 4^th floor at 4^th reading / development permit stage was approved while completely ignoring a very large opposition from the community – WHY?

• The Forewest Development on the bottom of the Willoughby Slopes. Staff worked with the developer and made an attempt in my last year in office to change the OCP and complete a rezoning (two by-laws) in one process that would completely change the density and character of this community. With a very strong opposition it was turned down. With very little change from the original proposal this development was brought back in front of the New Council, received strong opposition and it was approved. Ask yourself WHY?

• Fort Langley is one of the most unique communities in the Province of B.C. It’s heritage protection has been paramount as the Township of Langley has grown over the years. Recently, a building development (Coulter Berry Building) proposal on the old IGA site that contravened several of Fort Langley’s preservation guidelines received approval. It was too tall by 4.5 meters, site coverage that exceeded the allowable limit and it was contrary to the town’s main street heritage character. Approval was given despite wide spread opposition of a 950 person petition and 2 – 1 in opposition at the 2 evening Public Hearing. (There is only roughly 2,500 that live in Fort Langley)

Now the kicker – Eric Woodward, the owner of the Coulter Berry building, a Township of Langley appointee to the Heritage Advisory Committee, President of the Fort Langley BIA, fellow resident with Jack Froese in Bedford Landing and a donor of $2,000 to Jack Froese in the last election received approval! Only in the Township of Langley you say!

As hard as the following comments are to believe they tell an interesting story of the contempt the Mayor of the Township of Langley Council has for Public Hearings and Public Consultation – the residents of Surrey have to be very thankful that their Mayor and Council represent their views!

(Pete McMartin Vancouver Sun) Nov. 29/12

Mayor Froese was asked why he voted for it despite the evidence of so much local opposition states:

• “he does not govern by petition”.

Of the preponderance of speakers opposing the variance at the official hearings Mayor Froese states:

• “We really have to listen to the silence of the people who didn’t come out.”

Pete McMartin states “How Froese intuited that this absent cohorts silence was in favor of the Coulter Berry development and not against it, or split down the middle, is a mystery I will leave with him. Politicians have powers of the mind I cannot fathom.” Despite the size of the opposition only one councilor voted against, it sure says something about what is going on, doesn’t it!

I am going to be more to the point – Is Mayor Froese at all well? This kind of thinking for someone in the Mayor’s chair is unconscionable. Go back to my opening – Many elected politicians think they were elected because they are smarter than those that elected them, well here is the proof. This kind of thinking is unmitigated garbage, all taxpayers should be outraged!

So let’s see if we understand what is going on – Apparently Mayor Froese doesn’t make decisions based on petitions, he doesn’t make decisions based on speakers at a Public Hearing – So WHY DO WE HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS? – We will just have Mayor Froese and his Council colleagues determine what is best for the Township based on their seemingly special powers. (Other municipalities and cities apparently lack this special insight) It is a pathetic excuse for Municipal Governance !!

There is much more that could be said and examples that could be shown. It is long past due that the taxpayers in the Township of Langley unite in opposition against the Township of Langley Municipal Council’s continuous willingness to proceed with developments despite the will of the people they represent. What is it going to take to motivate the taxpayers in the Township????

_____________________________________________________________________________________

It is hard to keep up with all the issues being presented by this council but my late week Post will deal with the subversion of democracy in Council Chambers, for those elected or for those that just want to know what is going on!

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!

“We continue to hear justified complaints about serious issues in the Township of Langley, but we continue to have a poor turnout in municipal elections and elect those responsible for years of costly irresponsible decisions! WHY? Remember the old saying “You get the government you deserve”?

Welcome to my first LANGLEY WATCHDOG BLOG posting which is an introduction as to WHY I have decided to stay involved to speak about local issues, WHY I want to get the truth out about Municipal issues and WHY I want to bring to light some thought about Municipal issues that taxpayers in the Township of Langley should be very concerned with. We have got to break out of the complacency that is affecting so many. It is my sole intention for this BLOG to educate, engage, and inform residents about a number of Municipal issues that should be given serious consideration going into the next Municipal election. This BLOG will frequently touch on Provincial politics and issues as they affect the Township of Langley leading into the May Provincial Election and beyond.

If all else fails, (If the issues weren’t so serious it would be hilarious!) the information that I will provide about the thinking, or lack thereof, from our politicians over the past number of years should provide some comedic entertainment. In fact the entire municipal political scene in the Township of Langley before the 2008 election was a contemptible joke sadly laid upon the residents of the Township of Langley. “It hasn’t changed.”

It all leads to the question – When are taxpayers going to say enough is enough of our ongoing incompetent elected Municipal Leadership?

I will concentrate on providing a detailed and objective account of what has been so fundamentally wrong and flawed with the decisions made by most members of the current council on a number of major issues. Many of these issues have never been thoroughly or even remotely investigated or properly reported on by our local press. In my opinion a disservice to everyone.

The reporting and INVESTIGATION of these issues should be the responsibility of an effective and objective local press, but sadly no such luck. Residents expect the press to ask the pertinent questions of both sides of an issue and present a balanced perspective! Given this reality one question does come to mind – the fact the Township of Langley spends close to $250,000 a year of your tax dollars on advertising between the Langley Advance, Langley Times and Aldergrove Star, is it a conflict of interest and in the print media’s best interest to, “tow the Establishment Line” and not challenge the status quo? Just asking the obvious question. As you follow my blog postings, you will notice that this question is a common theme throughout the operation of our local government.

It would have been very easy for me to drift off into the sunset of my political career and say, “I did my best to right the wrongs and now it is somebody else’s turn”. Fortunately or unfortunately, it has never been my way to take the easy way out. So be prepared for a couple of significant posts per week!

A little history for the record!

In 1996 my wife and I decided to move out to the Township of Langley, buy our farm, our horses, truck and trailer and quite frankly go into a life preparing ourselves for retirement away from the pressures of running our own business and many years of politics which we had been very active in for the best part of twenty five years in Delta. In short THE LAST THING I was interested in doing was to get back into politics. Fast forward to late 2006 I was approached by some neighbors concerned about the relocation of a cell tower wanting some help in their campaign. The rest is history, one issue led to another and after considerable investigation on every issue I was furious about what was going on in the Township of Langley. I could not believe their way of doing business, it was nothing remotely close to my experience in other municipalities! Decisions were made, not for the benefit of the taxpayer, but for the obvious benefit of a very few – what I will call the Township Establishment. So, do you lay down and accept what is happening or fight to change the culture of greed, bullying, and favors for friends and insiders?

I will also do numerous features on the actions of the current council and why residents of the Township of Langley have got to wake up to what is being done to them by their elected representatives in Municipal Hall.

The 2008 Election issues that caused me to come out of political retirement?

• Non-sustainable and unprecedented tax and spending increases;
• Land sales to friends and insiders at pennies on the dollar;
• Metering private wells;
• Accepting the imposition of Heavy Rail traffic increase through the Langleys when other options were available;
• Approving the Mufford Cresc. Diversion in secret (no public input);
• Top Down Community Planning;
• Approval of what is now the Bedford Landing Condominium Wall in Fort Langley (ignored significant public opposition);
• Dramatic overruns and very poor budget planning on major capital projects (no public input);
• Buying the Redwoods golf course and Bedford House Restaurant (no public input) in addition to numerous examples of not listening to the public.

The following is interesting in light of the most recent of many dim-whitted actions by our resident bully Rich Coleman. In February of 2008, after my public announcement that I was running for Mayor, out of courtesy I sent a message by email and/or voice mail to all sitting councilors as well as MLAs Mary Polak and Rich Coleman. The response; I heard from and met with four councilors and MLA Rich Coleman. At this point I will relate an interesting conversation I had in my meeting with Rich Coleman. (For the record I would swear an affidavit to the validity of the following, a lie detector test if required) It was in February of 2008 and in response to my message and request for a meeting, I received a call from Rich Coleman’s office to set up a meeting in his then Aldergrove office.

On my arrival (interesting, then Councilor Jordan Bateman was hanging out in Coleman’s office when I got there)  we went into his boardroom with just the two of us in the meeting. We got into it right off the top:

Rich Coleman: So what is this meeting about?

Rick Green: I just wanted to drop by and introduce someone who is running for Mayor.

Rich Coleman: Well, WE are OK with the job the Mayor is doing.

Rick Green: Well, we are not.

Rich Coleman: I want you to know two things; the CAO (Mark Bakken – Chief Administrative Officer) is a good friend of mine.

Rick Green: That’s interesting

Rich Coleman: And you have been making noises about some land deals, and I want you to know WE are OK with them. (note: the specifics are a topic for another day)

Rick Green: Well we are not, it is bull shit and it is going to stop.

After that frosty exchange, I was surprised that the meeting lasted a while longer. Believe me, there was no doubt that I was not his choice for Mayor, (Somehow I don’t think I fit his mold of “do as I say’) but then again, I could have cared less. He was the last person in the world I was trying to impress. The haunting question from that meeting that still remains unanswered is, WHO was Rich Coleman referring to with respect to “WE” being OK with the mysterious land deals, and “WE” being OK with the then Mayor Kurt Alberts. Who is “WE”?  Just asking the question? The Establishment? WHO? Very interesting comment which probably tells a lot!

Spurred on by a number of residents, I resurrected that political experience I had put into the history books, ran for Mayor and to the shock of The Establishment and many others we won! The next three years proved the old saying, “Be careful about what you wish for”!

I had a clear choice on every decision that I made and had to make. I could have given in to members of council and reneged on everything I stood for and promised the electorate during the election campaign OR I could stand by my convictions and do what was right. How many times have you heard or said to yourself “I wish we would elect someone who would not stand for the status quo and had the guts to do what the taxpayers wanted for a change?” Where I come from there was no choice. I knew from the outset that if I had played the game and fell into line (the wishes of the establishment) I would still be the Mayor today. Something else was very clear, my campaign criticisms of the previous Mayor obviously included the re-elected council members (who were all part of the flawed decisions and policy I was very critical of pre the 2008 election).

So my term started off with the strong opposition of at least six if not seven members of council. (If you don’t believe me, just go back on the voting record of every major issue I brought forward). Now in fairness I have to say I understand how members of council felt, after all wouldn’t any of you be embarrassed if you had played a major role in voting for the most unbelievably flawed decisions in Township of Langley history? I was very aware from the start of my term that I was being set up to defend myself against this question at the time of the next election “How can all the councilors be wrong? It must be the Mayor”. Well folks as hard as it is to believe, YES, seven or eight councilors CAN be wrong! I was the outsider who came in and upset their apple cart. All they desired was to maintain the status quo which would continue the benefit for the lucky few. I stepped on some very large toes while in office because I decided to do what was right. After all, this is why I ran. There is no way that I would capitulate to the irresponsible, and wrong decisions that have been a fixture in the Township of Langley for years. Unfortunately those irresponsible decisions continue and are getting worse, if that is possible! Jack Froese is Kurt Alberts LIGHT!

I thought that the issues that caused me to come out of retirement were mind boggling. Believe me, I hadn’t seen anything yet.? My eyes were opened in my first agenda and my first meeting with Council on December 8^th, 2008. It was a precursor of things to come over the next three years.

I can recall saying to some members of council in our early days that we can disagree without being disagreeable and we can have debate and disagree without hating each other, unfortunately members of council couldn’t get passed the fact I was elected and they were determined it would be for one term. I have ample evidence to support that statement, but this BLOG is not about re-fighting the last election, but it is about holding council’s feet to the fire seeing that the local press seem to have no interest in doing so.

It may be surprising to many but I am thrilled with what we accomplished, (about 80% of what I promised to do) over my three years. Now it is very clear that I was made into the lightening rod, well I am no longer there. The facts that will be presented in this BLOG have been acquired over three years as the CEO of the Township of Langley, my knowledge, skills and abilities are derived from my career as TOL Mayor, Alderman in Delta, 25 years actively involved in Municipal and Provincial politics as well as an extensive business career and successful business ownership. (See my CV)

In closing it is my sincere hope that all readers will read my posts carefully, objectively and be open about sharing it with others. I encourage you to challenge me, debate me, disagree/agree with me by commenting on this blog. (keep it clean and not slanderous or libelous) Please feel free to contact me by email or voice mail at any time (All contacts will be held in strictest confidence). OH and by the way we will also be producing interesting posts related to provincial politics and what you may want to consider relative to their involvement and interference  in your municipality.

RG

———————————————————————————————————————————————————

In light of Casino-gate in Surrey last week, early next week I will offer some views and opinion on what really goes on in the area of Municipal Public Process, the rules behind them  – and those who don’t think the rules, or at the very least respect that should be given, doesn’t apply to them!

Have a great weekend!

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

Share this BLOG with your friends, neighbors and relatives!

To Reply to this Post – CLICK on the comment under RECENT COMMENTS below.