Oh woe are we with the latest revelations that Bill Bell has brought forward in today's North Shore News. He claims that Mayor Mussatto should be stepping aside on the topic of Coach Houses when it comes to voting on the topic. Its a matter of conflict of Interest.
"According to legal advice given to municipalities, if it is an issue that impacts the general population or a broad section of it, there is no conflict. Tax increases and broad changes to the OCP like the current question relating to coach houses, would fall into this category -- although it might be considered a conflict if a council member had submitted a coach house proposal to the municipality."- Bill Bell
The problem as I see it is Bill Bell has far too many fond memories to fall back on when writing from his Mexican habitat, he's to the point that he is starting to lose track of the realities that are happening in our midst. Just how many Mayors have ridden their bikes along the whole July 1 parade route, handing out water bottles to hot parade watchers and coincidentally Bill Bell didn't take notice of that solitary effort in the Press when he had the chance to.
Question is how do you rate your Mayor's effort.
86 opinions/comments:
I thought Bill Bell's column in todays' Snews was excellent. He's not out of touch. Actually I find him very insightful most of the time.
However, although very frank, I disagree with his opinion to do away with school trustees.
Bill Bell is awesome. He's the only guy from the North Shore News that has a clue when it comes to the challenges facing Lower Lonsdale.
Bell is the real deal as far as I'm concerned. Maybe he never became mayor, but he's one of this community's most compelling personalities.
This "writer" is misrepresenting Bill Bell's opinion.
The Mayor's Coach House was approved long ago and nothing to do with the current motion coming to Council.
Try to understand what is written before you publicly accuse someone of illegal acts. The Mayor should be suing you.
And the whole "handing out water bottles to hot parade watchers" is just a PR gesture anyway.
Folks, can those of us who are not lawyers, or who at least haven't been sued for libel in the past, please refrain from going on about "you could be sued."
The reality of such lawsuits - and the expense - is nothing like what you see on TV.
Bill Bell didn't accuse the mayor of an illegal act. He is just trying to hold politicians to a high standard of ethics...good on him.
What I find amazing about Bill Bell's column is that he can write such insightful columns from Mexico.
Mussatto should excuse himself from the Coach House debate.
I wonder if Bell Bell's coach house in Mexico has any guests living in it?
Aren't water bottles suppose to hurt the enviroment? Shame on Mussatto for showing a lack of environmental leadership!
Bill Bell didn't libel the Mayor, the idiot "Interested ..." did when he rewrote what Bell said.
He or she SHOULD be sued!
I see that Barry has deleted most of IIC's comments and his following Anon's comments from Wendy's article before he shut it down.
Maybe he should delete this libelous article as well.
“Wart hogs should sue for libel. It is a terrible name and they are fine fellows [and] devoted family men and it is rare to see one by himself; the little woman and the kiddies are usually close at hand.”
I would suspect that Mayor Mussatto will just brush this off.
I may be one of the few here who thinks that Bell raised a good point in regards to the School Trustees. It hit me during the last election of the board and while looking at the candidates that perhaps none of them really had the qualifications to run for what is essentially a multi -million dollar specialized biz that has a profound impact on a great many people’s daily lives. Last year when Ms. Skinner did not have the sense to stay out of the voting on the spending of funds on a “special education” school that 2 or 3? of her children were reported to be attending & the money being spent benefited only a small percentage of the students in the district, that confirmed it for me that the old ways of doing things are in need of a big overhaul.
Before some start slamming me for these comments please know that I have the upmost respect for anyone who chooses to join such a public board and I continue to respect the vast majority of the past and current members for having done so. My concerns are with the system we use to put them on the board & the boards function or lack of function and not with the members themselves.
Here are just a few of my reasons for agreeing with Mr. Bell. We have senior admin at the Board office that we pay well due to their years of education & experience in their profession. Why would I expect an elected board member to make a better decision than the people we have hired to do so, when many of those elected have little experience in such a big biz and who’s only real life experience in the world of education is the fact their children go to school? Compound that to the reality that a large number of the trustees have had little experience in establishing or reading a budget the size they have before them on the School Board. Few of the trustees we elect have/had any previous experience lobbying the provincial government? How much of the Senior Admins time is spent dealing with trustee issues. When I look at the School Dist. website and note the description and functions listed for the Superintendent it suggests to me that perhaps a lot of their time is spent babysitting trustees. Could their time which we are paying dearly for be better spent?
Could the answer be that we set minimum requirements in so far as professional experience and education for those who run for the Board? If not why not? Professional experience & education play a large part in the decision as to whether or not someone is appointed to a large corporate board or BC Government appointed boards? Why not the School Board? Could the answer be that we do away with the board? In its place could the admin staff gather public input as to what people want to see happen and have staff spell out what in their profession opinions the pros and cons of each approach to an issue are. Settle it with a public electronic vote on their website once a month or quarterly? It’s just a thought. Perhaps someone has a better idea?
I really do not know what the answers are but I agree with Mr. Bell that it really is time to take a serious look at alternatives.
As far as the Mayor goes he could use some educating on how uncool plastic bottles are. LOL
Yikes let's let the bureaucrats run our public institutions without any true accountability!
And to let a group of teachers run a 150 million enterprise seems like a fantastic idea. The current Superintendent and his assistant superintendents are all teachers. Giving them full access to the cookie jar is no way to solve the current economic realities.
School trustees need to come from a broad section of the community and should provide members of the community with a voice. If they don't like that voice they can kick them out three years later.
It's called democracy and lose it at your own peril.
How come a few people always think they're smarter than the people who pay the bills?
LOL Trust me I don't think I am smarter. I just question a process that is flawed.
I am also not suggesting that giving the district staff full access to the cookie jar is the answer either. You missed the part where I said that you & I would get to vote on where the money is actually spend rather than just a select few.
Actually I would be equally fine with leaving the board in place if we could somehow raise the bar in regards to their qualifications and experence.
Just food for thought.
It is becoming increasingly apparent that this blog is skewed to the East.
Politics is power, the ultimate power, and you should only seek it to do good.
Wendy,
Another one of your posts shut down??
Such a trouble maker.
That thread was a bit much. The mentality of many of the comments came from people who act their shoe size and not their age.
First, I apologize for this off topic comment.
John, many of those comments were out of frustration with the OP's censorship in earlier postings and her reluctance to properly engage in discussion of her topic, when challenged.
I hope Wendy took note of that.
CM
Back on topic...does Bill Bell as a columnist do a good job of making us think and question the political process here on the North Shore, or should the NSNews fire him and hire someone local to do the job?
Wendy must have some really, really small shoes.
Definitely makes us think. Two recent columns that come to mind are the one Bill wrote re: Sheila Bouman as school trustee candidate and the other re: Municipal Election Laws. Both very thought provoking.
Anyone who knows Bill Bell,(as I do as a past political friend) realizes that he lived on the North shore for over 50 years, graduated from North Vancouver Highschool, and Capilano College, was a long time council and school board reporter for the North shore News, has been on the board of almost every major organization on the north shore, (rec commission, North Shore Neighborhood House, Emergency services, Presentation House, ect ect,)spent 12 years on city council and now has written one of the most important opinion columns for the North Shore News for three years.
He was David Schrecks campaign manager in three elections,was Mike Harcourt's head of election communications, ran for the Federal Liberals and now runs several successful news and travel websites in Mexico...www.ontheroadin.com and www.jaltembasol.com.
As a previous writer said... he is "one of this community's most compelling personalities."
We and the North shore News are truly lucky to have him...and I do not agree with his current opinions often...but he does as is evidence on this blog makes us stop and think and most importantly question local politics.
John Jensen made it clear tonight with his weekly appearance and attached Power Point presentation, that he was running for Council as the anti-CNV staff candidate.
His geeky material and unique behaviour in trying to look like he is a staff member is quite curious but he will be a welcome change to Council.
"the anti-CNV staff candidate"
Sorry, but can you explain what you mean by this? Is he against the staff who work at CNV, or did you mean something else? Thanks.
I was hoping Jenson would run for School Board, but then again, there may not even be a School Board in 2011, so maybe he would be better to set his sights on City Council instead.
Jensen's presentations is always a direct challenge or attack on staff and their work. Far too often to be just helpful.
John, forget the cynic naysayers and keep up the good work.
First , everybody complains that there is too much citizen apathy. Then, when people like you and Barry Forward step forward to fight apathy, you get shot down by those that are quick to judge, but are too lazy to get off their own fat asses to do anything themselves.
Keep doing what you are doing and you'll have my vote if/when you run for local office. It worked for Barry, and it could work for you as well.
Thank you for what you do.
Yeowch!
For the record, I have made two presentations this year to the Finance Committee of City of North Vancouver Council.
One, in September, about the relative size of the CNV's financial reserves when compared to other jurisdictions. I blogged about that here.
The second, tonight, was about suggesting that the City move to a more performance-based system for budgeting and operations. Afterwards the Finance Director said that the city I used as a comparator, Sunnyvale California, is apparently touted by the Government Finance Officers Association as one of the leading municipalities North America in this regard. I suppose then I was suggesting that City be more like one of the best-run cities in North America, as judged by managers of hundreds of other municipalities. I don't see how that makes me "anti-staff".
I have not had a lot of interaction with City staff but I can say that every single discussion has been helpful, earnest, and fruitful. They work in a difficult role with a public that is indifferent 99% of the time.
That's actually why I made tonight's presentation. City staff have apparently been wrestling for some months with a significant policy discussion about how/whether to adjust the mix of utility rates. The end result, at the extremes, could increase them by up to 135% for some groups, or lower them by 28% for others. It's therefore an important issue. Yet, the total public input that was gathered was 8 survey responses from CNV residents and 2 from CNV businesses/government agencies, and that was much earlier in the process. The utility rate increase approved tonight had zero public input.
I honestly think that it would be much easier to engage with the public if there were more clearly described goals and measures that citizens and councillors could discuss and "trade off" against each other. It would also help to improve public understanding of the good and difficult work that City employees do.
I suspect some/much of this is done already but it's not communicated as well as it could be, at least in my view.
So, in sum, no, I am not "anti-staff".
My apologies for not giving Bil Bell a Quoted credit for his paragraph in my Post.
Secondly, to the Anonymous who wrote:
"Aren't water bottles suppose to hurt the enviroment? Shame on Mussatto for showing a lack of environmental leadership!"
On one hand you are asking a question and without waiting for an answer you lambast the Mayor for not showing environmental leadership....... the bottles are recyclable.
Saxton gave out water bottles, Mussatto gave out candy.
Regardless of who handed out the bottles I am suprised by it. Most orginizations & Companys no longer allow plastic water bottles to be used. They are band from use by most childrens sports orgs.
Would have been far better if the City had put up water stations along the way were people could have filled there own bottles. They could have also had a stand were people who did not bring a bottle could buy one and perhaps the profits could have gone to an charity in need?
Re Post of the 24th at 7:48AM by Interested Involved Citizen.
I sure hope you are joking in suggesting the Mayor or Saxton was showing Environmental Leadership in handing out plastic water bottles. If you were not joking I would suggest you avoid talking to any 5th grader or higher on the topic of plastic water bottles. LOL
Here are just a few of the reason why promoting the use of plastic water bottles is not showing environmental leadership even though as you say they are recyclable:
1)Up to 85 percent of plastic water bottles produced are not recycled but instead end up in landfills or incinerators. This is due to fact that they are most commonly used away from home were recycling bins may not be as handy.
2)Bisphenol A. I am sure you have heard about this one. It’s a chemical that has been in the news a lot in the past couple of years, as it can leach not only into the land fill but also into the person who is drinking from the bottle that is made with it.
3)The bottles that find their way to an incinerator are burned. Toxic chemicals are released into the environment when plastic is burned.
4)The bottles that end up in landfills take up a lot of space and leach chemicals into the ground and take hundreds of years to thousands of years to break down – how long it really takes is pretty hard to say but one things is for sure, none of us will live long enough to find out.
5)The manufacturing of plastic water bottles depletes natural resources such as oil and water. It takes more water to produce one bottle than the bottle itself can hold. The amount of oil used to produce one bottle would take up a third of the capacity of each bottle produced.
6)The “North Pacific Gyre”. I am sure you have heard about this as it has been well reported on over recent years as well. It is an area in the water off the California coast. An area reported to be larger than Quebec and 30 meters deep in discarded plastics. The wildlife eats and ends up being poisoned. According to David Susuki over a million birds and marine animals die every year from eating or becoming entangled in plastics.
Whenever they say "Up to 85 percent..." That means they have no idea how many are recycled or not. 100% of the plastic bottles I have used in the last two years have been recycled. I'm sure I'm not alone.
12:37 has it right.Handing out bottled water = bad idea.
The Board of Directors at the Federation of Canadian Municipalites last March voted & pasted a resolution urging all Canadian Municipalites to phase out the sale & use of bottled water on their properties.
Many cities in Canada had already stopped bottled water from being used or sold on their property - some as early as 07. Vancouver this spring voted to also stop buying and selling bottled water.
In the not to distant future you will not be able to buy bottled water at a city park or the PNE.
Our fine Mayor is well aware of this issue and I would be shocked if Mr. Saxton was not.
Anonymous 2:44 Yes up to 85% is a number that I have heard used often & appear to be pretty well accepted in the environmental science community. You can check this out at David Suzuki Foundation: http://www.davidsuzuki.org/about_us/Dr_David_Suzuki/Article_Archives/weekly05160801.asp
The number would not be all that hard to come up with. Take the total number of bottles manufactured and compare it to the total number that get back to recycling plants.
As someone who does recycle I also find the numbers hard to take but I do not doubt them. As I mentioned the reasons for the high number is mostly due to where the highest volumes of plastic water bottles are used. Mostly used away from home were a recycling bin may not be close at hand.
"How come a few people always think they're smarter than the people who pay the bills?"
Just because someone believes they are smart doesn't make it so.
Y'know, I'm new here, but generally on site like this it is accepted that comments should have at least a tenuous connection to the posted discussion topic. So far it looks like 65% of what's on this thread has nothing to do with Bell, or coach houses.
Actually the question of the post was not about how people feel about Bell or the Coach house but it was "how do you rate your Mayor's effort?"
Looks like a few people did not think his effort at the parade was a good one in so far as showing Environmental Leadership goes.
There goes the old racist Sue again.
That's totally wrong Barry. No one comments on the article, they post their little nonsense when they feel like it.
Contrary to what I wrote on Wendy's topic it turns out that I may censor those who write to this blog.
Hands up from those who want to keep it strictly on topic, or should some leeway be given to slide sideways but still maintain on topic.
Such as Barry Rueger's:
"The reality of such lawsuits - and the expense - is nothing like what you see on TV."
Did anyone else see this week the Global TV pieces slamming school boards for lack of accountability and fiscal restraint? It appears the public mood is moving towards scrapping school boards altogether.
In NV District, Trustees Barry Forward and Holly Back are likely to call it quits and switch to Council in next election as will Trustees Mary Tasi and Susan Skinner in NV City. The remaining trustees will likely dissolve off into oblivion where they belong.
Someday someone will not care about the expense and one the constant libelers like IIC will be taken to court and since the court might order all expenses to the libeler, he will probably suffer the consequences of his actions.
Maybe Wendy, with a court order Google will turn over the ISP of Anons who continuous harass and libel her.
Perhaps everyone should be commenting on a better blog that gets no comments and may be keep clear of nonsense - http://jjensen.ca/
Give some leeway be given to slide sideways but still maintain on general topic gets my vote.
At least CNV still has a finance committee - disbanding DNV's was pretty much James Ridge's last official act before leaving DNV.
I think Bill Bell and the NS News generally is positively scary in terms of the degree of influence they have - Bill's endorsement pretty much elected Sheila Boumann.
It is doubly scary when you consider the low level of coverage the NSN gives the District - I hope their coverage of the City is more in depth!
After reading this thread...I really appreciate the compliments and take some of the complaints to heart. Tell me how I can do a better job. I really do try to listen to all of you and my North shore News Readers and work my own experiences into a colunm.
North Vancouver is such a special place and despite apathy, we can all make a difference in keeping it special.
Tommorrow I celebrate american thanksgiving where Dorothy and I are cooking turkey and stuffing for over 80 of our american and Canadian friends here in Mexico. I wish you all the best and believe it or not, I at times miss the rains of North Vancouver's November.
And as I put on my facebook, anyone coming to Puerto Vallarta this winter, is more than welcome to visit and stay in my Coach House (Casita) in La penita.
After talking to Sue Lakes Cook, she and I agreed that the bulk of her comment could be deleted because it was way off topic, but I thought it best to leave the last part intact. - Interested Involved Citizen
*******************************
Sue Lakes Cook
"Do I actually think that the Mayor or Council will actually DO anything about this situation? Of course not, being polticially correct is far more important then caring about public safety.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009 5:13:00 PM"
Bill, you should concentrate on uncovering political scandal. You, more than anyone, knows that there is plenty of material there to investigate at City Hall. Mayor Mussatto destroyed your chance of becoming Mayor, did his best to put you out to political pasture for good, and then as soon as you started writing your column, Mussatto suddenly made a self-serving attempt to charm you and you fell for it 100%. Since then, you have let Mussatto get away with far too much. do you job. be a journalist and hold City Council more accountable...less fluff and more hard-hitting investigative journalism would be nice.
I try to save what I write for my column, but the previous writer is an obvious insider and deserves a response.
Mussatto was brilliant in what he did; he ensured that not only I but Barbara Sharp would eventually go down to defeat. I admire him for that, his tactics were magnificent and he out maneuvered me and Barbara Sharp. I truly underestimated him, something that I will not do in his role as Mayor.
Mussatto has for the most part been an excellent Mayor. However, I will give him no quarter when I see him make a mistake…the same goes for any politician. After all it only my opinion.
Bill, if I recall this correctly, Darrell promised to support your mayoralty campaign, if you stayed only a one term and then retired to Mexico.
He then realized that with his block of 500 Italian Canadian catholic votes, he might be in trouble if you got elected and firmed up your vote, so right at the last moment he withdrew his support for you and gave it to BS knowing that she was a walking titanic and would be ready for defeat when Mussatto ran the next term?
You can forgive his for that? Sounds like he is nasty. Didn’t you lose only by 180 votes? Yikes you are such a sucker….
Bill, perhaps its because you are stuck in Mexico, but you really are not aware the extend to which Mussatto is laughing behind your back.
He destroyed you and he is very proud of that. And, now, he has you working for him, especially when you make public comments such as "Mussatto has for the most part been an excellent Mayor".
If you actually lived in North Van, you would probably be a lot more aware of just how naive you really are about Mussatto.
What on earth would define him as an "excellent mayor".. good grief. You need to come back to watch him in a council meeting when he's bored or aggravated at someone.
Bill, you need to be more like Vaughn Palmer in the Van Sun. He really does his homework in keeping the provincial government accountable.
And, he would NEVER let himself be compromised by stating publicly that "the Premier is excellent" or the "Leader of Opposition is excellent." NS News readership will never be able to trust you whenever you discuss the Mayor, now that we know you are one of his biggest fans.
Ahhhh, the North Shore readership would only become aware if they read what showed up here on NVP.
I love armchair QBing elections...
In the next DNV Municipal election, Barry Forward and Holly Back won't stand a chance. Why? Because Don Bell and Janice Harris will likely be running for council again.
I suspect the current council will run again, and when you add in Bell and Harris, you will push the threshhold so high that first timers will not have a chance. Nixon and Bassam could be in jeopardy if Bell and Harris run again... Forward and Back wouldn't stand a chance.
I heard DNV Council will increase to eight seats in the next election to be more in line with the council size of other similarly populated municipalities in the lower mainland.
Won't happen.
The size of the council was reduced to 6+1 by Referendum, and the only way to increase it to the proper size of 8+1 would be to hold a referendum prior to the next election. Why would the current council go through the trouble of a referendum (which would almost certainly fail)? People would vote against the stand alone referendum because really, who needs more politicians? If they added the referendum to a genereal election ballot it might have a chance, but it wouldn't take effect until the next election. Net result... we're unlikely to see any newcomers make it on council next time.
snowballs chance in ...that DNV council will grow in size to 8.
Even if Bell and Harris were to run again it would be for Council not School Board so why would Forward and Back be at risk? I think both have things to prove at the Board level before considering moving up.
As for 8 councillors, there was no referendum - but the Community Charter specifies 8 for a community our size though Councils can opt out of this.
I think there's a consensus in District right now that 2 extra councillors would just add more cost and more bureaucracy for not a whole lot of extra benefit to the public. It would certainly change the flavor of Council!
Anon 2:06 PM said: "The size of the council was reduced to 6+1 by Referendum, and the only way to increase it to the proper size of 8+1 would be to hold a referendum prior to the next election."
That is a completely FALSE statement. Read the Community Charter. It very clearly states that Councils with populations over 50,000 can be eight Councillors plus a Mayor. NO REFERENDUM IS REQUIRED! It only requires a simple majority vote of Council to adopt the change. In fact, the Community Charter directs that any municipality over 50,000 should be eight+the Mayor. Technically, DNV Council violates Community Charter "guidelines" on Council size.
Bill start with the LEC. There are two staff members at the city that also hold positions at the LEC. Do they get issued 2 T4's at tax time? I think it’s evident that without the hidden subsidies provided by the the city the LEC would not exist. Is the city being forthright and truthful when questioned about the finances of the LEC?
District voted in 2004 Bi-election to keep the size of council at 6+1.
81% in favour, 16% opposed
Well, duh...
Question: Do you want more politicians?
Answer: 81% don't want more politicians.
What did you expect the answer would be?
The fact is that District of North Van Council is in violation of Community Charter guidelines on Council size.
It should be eight according to the Community Charter and District Council is obligated, but not forced, to follow this section of the Community Charter.
Bill Bell, you should spend some time in North Vancouver, talking to members of the community.
They say they are long tired of mayor Mussatto supporting highrise density and monstrosities such as the millenium project, or wanting to create a ghetto of highrises from the waterfront to the upper levels highway.
HE has HIS hand, in YOUR pocket.
And the developers who contributed to his campaign are laughing all the way to the bank, rubbing their hands with glee about his support of the unwanted overboard densities.
Let the OCP be the guideline, not the developers.
I predict that he will not get in again.
"obligated, but not forced"
Am I the only one who sees the oxymoronic nature of that comment?
I had forgotten about the question during the 2004 by-election (that elected Janice Harris and Jim Cuthbert) but as correctly stated District Council can fairly say they've listened to the people on this issue - the vote was simply not that close!
If I recall correctly Council decided they had ample time to increase the number of councillors from 6 to 8 in time for the 2005 election if the voter approved. They were going to settle the issue strictly at Council but given the need for a by-election felt it was a golden opportunity to get public input with little cost since an election was already being held. Since the proposition was heavily defeated that was the end of it.
(I'm not sure what the correct term for that vote was - the word referendum usually refers to money votes such as the 1996 vote on the LV Library and Lower Cap Rec Centre)
For those still reading along here and aren't up to speed on what Anonymous November 26, 2009 9:03:00 PM is saying by using the the acronym of LEC:
http://www.cnv.org/server.aspx?c=2&i=98
Lonsdale Energy Corporation
"Do they get issued 2 T4's at tax time?"
How does one find out whether employees of any municipalities are NOT receiving a T4 and on what grounds wouldn't they be required to be issued one?
RE Anonymous 26th 11:51:00 PM
If Bell spent more time talking to all the people in the community - not just the handfull of people on this blog he will hear the same thing that Massutto already knows. The generation behind him is very comfortable with higher density and see it as the only substanable choose.
I can only laugh when see people calling highrise communites ghettos - not family friendly - to much traffic to be livable - bluh bluh bluh...then in the next breath they say we need affordable housing.
Yet there are so many young families who have found Yaletown a nice place to raise their families that there is now not enough room in the school to meet the needs of all the children that live their.
Regardless of who comes and who goes & who takes the seat they will have to face the carbon foot print issue. They will not be allowed to ignore it. The generation behind the current group of NIMB's will find their voices as they will be the ones who end up living the longest with any decisions made. They grow up with Dr. Susuki and Plant Earth and they think globally. They know that the current OCP is not substabable and does nothing to reduce our carbon foot print. It is the next generation & there children that will have to live the longest with any decisions made.
IMHO there is not a mayor now or in the future that will not give a whole lot more weight to what the next generatin wants vs what an older generation of NIMBY's want.
The world population is growing and you can not stop it people. Get over it.
Anon 7:58 until you learn that there is no such word as "substabable" as you wrote, or even being anywhere close to the word "Sustainable", I have to treat all that you wrote as being suspect and "your" words were plagiarized so as to fit your blast against Bill Bell.
He's doing a great job, AND if the residents of the north shore would stop and look around at their own surroundings they could do a lot to improve what we have here without Bill bringing what he does to our attention every other week.
As it is, keep on writing Bill because you seem to have the knack to bring out the worst in your enemies, the best in you.
Anon 9:07 AM, I think that you're confused. I believe anon 7:58 AM was being critical of Anonymous November 26th, 11:51:00 PM, who was the one being critical of Bell (and was also making sweeping assumptions of what the citizens of CNV think).
CM
CM, Anon 11:51:00 PM sounds like a disgruntled City Councilor.
CM is correct. No issues with Bell.
Anyone watch the show the "Carbon Hunters" last night. Worth watching if it is on again. Might shock a few here to see just what is happening already in regards to the need for Carbon Tax credits.
Twenty years ago the BC natives blocked major corps from logging. Today BC natives are entertaining offers from a major oil company to sell land they intend to log to the oil company. The oil company gets the carbon tax credit for saving the land from logging.
Who over 50 would have thought they would live to see that ever happen?
The times are indeed changing.
And Carbon Hunters has what to do with the question of your thoughts on how the Mayors are doing on the north shore.... unless of course you think that Lonsdale Energy Corporation is somehow tied into the Carbon qualifier... although the CEO over at LEC is claiming a benefit from HST
The Carbon Hunters has a lot to do with the Mayors of the NS. The need for Carbon Credits will play a big part in much of what they do in the very near future if in fact it is not already the case. Those who think they are going to get a mayor out of office over higher density are in for a suprise. As indicated the show was well worth watching as it real drove home how the Carbon Credit system works and what people will do & in many cases already doing to get the credits.
Actually the LEC in a recent news release claimed to be going solar due to the Carbon Tax. So 1:24 is correct in suggesting it will have an impact on decisions made at our City Halls & in fact in appears it already is.
"That is a completely FALSE statement. Read the Community Charter. It very clearly states that Councils with populations over 50,000 can be eight Councillors plus a Mayor. NO REFERENDUM IS REQUIRED! It only requires a simple majority vote of Council to adopt the change. In fact, the Community Charter directs that any municipality over 50,000 should be eight+the Mayor. Technically, DNV Council violates Community Charter "guidelines" on Council size."
I did read the community Charter. In section 118 it states:
(3) A council may, by bylaw, establish the number of council members as a mayor and 4, 6, 8 or 10 councillors.
(4) If a bylaw under subsection (3) would
(a) reduce the number of council members, or
(b) maintain the current number of council members, despite an increase that would otherwise result under subsection (2),
it may only be adopted if it receives the assent of the electors.
If the council had not passed a bylaw BY REFERENDUM (Assent of the Electors), then DNV council would have automatically grown to 8+1. Instead they attached the referendum question to the 2004 by-election ballot and received over %80 support maintaining the existing size. The council never violated the Community Charter, they followed the process outlined in it to a T.
p.s. It wouldn't have required a referendum to increase to 8+1 in 2005, but it certainly required one to reduce/maintain it. The interesting question is this: If council wanted to increase to 8+1 now would they have to go back to a referendum? or could they do that by majority rule?
One thing I heard recently at Council was that really mystified me was that NV District had recently spent $17,000 on carbon credits.
I mean - if with over 1 million trees in DNV we're not ROLLING in revenue from such credits (at least to a small degree) what must our emissions be like?
And if we're that bad how bad must the rest of the Lower Mainland who don't have our million plus trees be? In fact does ANY local municipality have the number of trees DNV does either per capita or in absolute terms?
Inquiring minds would like to know. (grin)
Lyle, I would also like to know the answer to your question. Keep in mind that the District does not own some of the land/parks those trees sit on. GVRD has some of it and BC Parks others. I suspect our emissions are high due to the fact we are mainly single family homes in the District. Some say a single family home emits 4 times the amount of carbo gas than one highrise apartment unit does.
The cardon credits are not given out based on what you already have but what you have done to reduce carbon out put. So the trees we already have do not count.
Complete details of the GHG emissions from every BC municipality and regional district are here. A report for DNV is here.
So clear-cutting our forests and then replanting is more meritorious than conserving them?
That's the 'logic' expressed by that formula and I'm afraid I don't buy it.
Actually John they would get no credits for clear cutting and reforesting an area that was already designated as an active forest & reforesting was already the normal practise. They would not be doing anything new which is what the credits are based on. Now if the company doing the clear cutting did not reforest in the past but started to reforest then yes they would get some credits for it.
Sorry that last post was meant to be in answer to Lyle not John.
The logic Lyle is that the whole thing is based on what we had in place and what our carbon output was in 2007. We have to get the 07 number down by 33%. So parks & trees we had in 07 do not count as they were in place already. If we were to take a forested area that was designated in 07 for development and say it is now a park then that would go towards a credit. Same as if we were to rezone an area that was single family in 07 and build highrises on it in 2011 that would also count as a credit.
Post a Comment