Monday 28 October 2013

28 Oct Council Meeting

During Public Input 4 past candidates made points and one person I think will be a candidate next year, Kerry Morris, challenged the Chief Administration Officer, in fact without calling him a liar, did so without using that specific word. See Kerry Morris vs the LCE article for more info.

Ivan Leonard, 2008 candidate, talked about the Business Improvement Association and recommended that a Council grant of $60,000 be returned to the taxpayers.

John Harvey, a former school board candidate talked about Police Board meetings.

I, a candidate for Mayor in 2022, appeared to ask rhetorically, since this is not a question period, when the CUPE 389 contract would be done. It expired almost 2 years ago.

Amanda Nichol, a council candidate, spoke about a Notice of Motion submitted by Councillor Heywood. She wanted to for the debate not be one of subsizing housing vs rec centers. Of course, as this is a Notice of Motion, the actual debate will be next meeting.

The North Van Urban Forum reported results of their "Design Jam focused on the waterfront.

The Presentation House Gallery laid out their plan and business case.  This is discussed in my article, "

Councillor Bookham questioned about the size of the proposed building. She also received confirmation that there would be no parking as part of their site.  City giving 2.5 million plus the land.  I have still not heard whether any of the old land is being sold to fund this new gallery.

Councillor Heywood asked if the new design would fit in to the nautical theme of the rest of the waterfront. It seemed not.

Councillor Clark asked if there had to be another coffee shop in the facility.  It looks so. He also asked if the increased fundraising to support operating costs  is reasonable.  Of course, the rep thought so, it's his report.

The Mayor set up the slowest pitch possible to give Reid some time to brag about the gallery.  Why?  It didn't seem like the gallery funding was in danger and needed the Mayor to play games.

  

Approve my building or dolphins will die!

All amenities gained by the City should be given as a cash contribution to one Central Fund with pre-approved "big ticket" items being the receipt such as a new Harry Jerome Rec Center.

Lets say we have a shady developer who proposes a building or series of buildings that seriously violate the Official Community Plan, being to dense, too high and far too much of everything. How will they ever make their skyhigh profits and leave while North Van citizens live with the various negative effects of their project.  Crowding, traffic and the destruction of sight lines are just a few.

First, these developer will donate money to a majority of members of Council.  Not enough to raise suspicions of bribery but enough to make them grateful and establish the kind of relationship that shady developers understand.

Second, they will find a "cause" and a local group to campaign it.  Saving dolphins from being trapped in aquariums for example, anything to deflect the attention away from the project itself. This group of activists will make presentation videos of trapped and dying dolphins that will bring a tear to the eye and those who oppose the 100 floor building will look evil monsters.

Third, they will come to the public hearing and counter every reasoned argument against the project with "But what about the dolphins? Don't you care about the dolphins?"  Animal rights activists will make from West Van or New West will speak at the public hearing and make it appear like actual North Van citizens are in support of the building and then they will go to Vancouver and protest the high buildings there.

Last, Council will approve of the project as it has taken a while so must be okay.



Sunday 27 October 2013

Museum Monday (Foot of Lonsdale Phase 1)

There will a recap of the Urban Forum's design jam, now that it looks like the Council will go in a different direction.  A shout out for Ben and Tyler and NVUF for trying to do something different in this town.

http://www.cnv.org/attach/2013%2010%2028%20item%2007PP.pdf

It also looks like the the new gallery will be not be in the old pipe building in the center of the what will probably be a public square east of the current proposed site.

http://www.cnv.org/attach/2013%2010%2028%20item%2008PP.pdf

This is part of the what brings people to the waterfront area but it will not be the number one draw.  Read through the design jam to see if there is the kernel of an idea in there.  Despite the appearance of the usual suspects who focus on just one component of open space and oppose the Collier's report which focuses on retail "cafe" space and a small expansion of the hotel space, typifying it as an entirely new hotel project.  Keep an eye on Sandra Grant and Sandra Hudson who may be candidates for Council as part of an Urban Forum slate in one year.  But surmising about the election will wait until my November 15th article "One year to go".

http://download.isiglobal.ca/cnv/archive_2013-10-07.mp4.html?start=00:02:56

So we left to wonder what will be the "big draw" to get public into this area.  Something that will drawn people to the museum and other features so they will spend money in the museum "Bristro wine bar, a juice bar and a yogurt type business.
Mayor has floated a couple of ideas to start people thinking, a branch of the Vancouver aquarium although keeping sea life prisoner is strange way of showcasing North Vancouver and a ferris wheel.  Before you laugh look a look at London England, their ferris wheel catches the eye.  In that spirit, I would suggest a balloon ride, a kind of trial balloon.


The City is going to own the Gallery and is putting $250,000 from the Lower Lonsdale Amenity Reserve Fund towards the fundraising drive.  This is the second installment of a $500,000 donation by the City. The City had committed a total of $400,000 which has now grown to $500,000. This does not include free staff time. This is part of $2.5 million project plan item for the relocation of the gallery.  Presumably, $2 million is intended to be raised to repay the City for the building expenses. The project is contingent on it. Like the maritime museum, it also could fail due to a lack of funding.

http://www.cnv.org/attach/2013%2010%2028%20item%2008%20-%20Business%20Case%20Report.pdf

It should be noted in the Business that it is heavily dependant on government support and fundraising.  The City has told them that they will only get the same (and not increasing) subsidy as the present gallery.  $145,000 for Year 1 but the federal subsidy ($140,000) and the provincial subsidy ($145,000).  They anticipate that federal and provincial support will increase but if some of it doesn't come, you know our Council will step in with extra cash.

I assume the Year 1 will be budget year 2016 as that is when the project is intended to be done and the fundraising team will have "gone to the well" a lot to actually build the building which would impact the annual giving campaign. So they require donations of $300,000 a year to meet their budget.




Tuesday 22 October 2013

Kerry Morris vs the Lonsdale Energy Corporation



Kerry doesn't have a good opinion of the LEC.  He appeared during the public hearing at Finance Committee last night to make a presentation titled "LEC Loans (past, present and future).  By the end of his time, Kerry and the Chief Administration Officer didn't even agree to disagree, Mr Tollstam said he was wrong and Kerry said he (and the city) was wrong.



For those who are not aware of the LEC, renters like me who for now are not affected by it, the LEC can be best thought of a municipal Crown Corporation as it is a corporation owned entirely by the CNV, really us the taxpayers.  The term does not really apply as most Crown Corps, like Canada Post is the Government (Federal or Provincial) is a service that the government operates because a normal business would not be able to operate that service.



The LEC is a corporation wholely owned by the CNV where it has thrust itself into the marketplace to complete against a Provincial Crown Corp and several real corporations.  It is part of the "green" changes to old way of doing things which of course usually means the taxpayers have subsidize it.  But the LEC tells us they set the rates below the price charged by BC Hydro and others.  Councillor Heywood pointed out the assumptions made to determine what the average person pays is inflated.  It really a mute point as the Council requires that any new structures over 10,000 sq ft have to use the LEC.  So there is no competition or free marketplace.



Going back to the outstanding loan issue, this needs to be broken down.  Kerry states that the LEC "has received public loans in excess of $10,664,000 from the City" and that "there currently no realistic plans in place to repay these funds."



First, lets get $2,000,000 off the table.  The CNV loaned the LEC this amount to start the corporation.  It is reported every year in the Statement of Financial Information as money owed.  There is no indication of when it will be paid back.  The CNV made this an interest free loan so the amount never increases.  Neither party seems to be concerned if this money is ever paid back to the taxpayers.  Seeing the LEC coming back to the trough this year for more loans indicates the likelihood of repayment.



Second, there is the question of staff.  Kerry claims that the LEC has no employees and all work performed on behalf of LEC is currently being paid out of the City's payroll.  The CAO said every bit of time spent by city staff was charged to LEC and was paid for.  He didn't say whether there was a running bill or line of credit or all  bills were paid when incurred.


So in this, they both may be right.  One thing I can say safely is that the LEC is not a real corporation.  If paying the CNV for staff duties, they avoid the HR costs of staff.  In addition, if the LEC were a CNV department, they would be subject to democratic rules and public scrutiny.  Kerry has made them face the issue in public and it was the LEC that contributed to the defeat of former Councillor Fearnley.  The CAO has said that the issue will come before Council soon but will it be a secret meeting where it is voted on without public discussion?

One rule applies, "if matters have to be done in secret, it's because politicians and bureaucrats have something to hide.  


If LEC can price their product lower than their competitors without subsidization, then they can exist in the marketplace and the City could sell the asset.   Of course, part of their success in attracting clients is based on the City's ability to force taxpayers to become customers.  If Kerry's suspicions are shown to be correct, then it is another green con job that taxpayers are paying the price for.





NOTE: This blog has delayed my article on the lack of Community Associations in the City.

21st Oct Cash is always better than anticipation

Bringing my laptop to meeting allows me post right away rather than the "I'll get around to it during the first part of the week." 

The saga of the Onni housing for My Own Spaces ended with no debate as they received a report which seemed to call all the bidders to submit further paperwork.   The motion with the Mayor and Councillors Keating and Buchanan voting against was:

6. Land Matter – File: 5040-03-01 

 Report: Manager, Lands and Business Services and Community 
Planner, Community Development, September 16, 2013 

PURSUANT to the report of the Manager, Lands and Business Services 
and Community Planner, Community Development, dated September 16, 
2013, entitled "1308 Lonsdale: Affordable Housing and Childcare 
Expression of Interest": 

THAT staff be directed to invite S.U.C.C.E.S.S., Hollyburn Family Services 
Society, the YMCA Metro Vancouver, and My Own Space Housing 
Society Connections, to respond to a Request for Proposal for the lease or 
ownership of the affordable housing amenity and report back to Council; 

THAT staff be directed to invite Lonsdale Creek Daycare Society and the 
North Shore Neighbourhood House to respond to a Request for Proposal 
for the lease or ownership of the childcare community amenity and report 
back to Council; 

AND THAT the report of the Manager, Lands and Business Services and 
Community Planner, dated September 16, 2013, with respect to a "Land 

Matter", remain in the Closed session.

Note. I have corrected this after reading the draft minutes. Without being in the secret meeting, I laid out what happened.
1.  Councillor Keating and the NDP councillors tried to assign two $5 million dollar facilities in the upcoming Onni building to two organisations, the North Shore Neighbourhood House and My Own Spaces.

2. Council forced the issue to an Expression of Interest, a process which would examine among other things, the qualifications to ensure the winner would best able to provide the services.

3. Obviously by the motion, the Lonsdale Creek Daycare Society put in an application, along with the NS Neighborhood House and S.U.C.C.E.S.S., the Holyburn Family Services, the YMCA Metro Vancouver and the My Own Spaces Housing Society Connections.

4. It is likely that under the requirements of the bidding the MOSHSC did not qualify as they had formed a lobby group which as Councillor Keating said "did the heavy lifting" lobbied hard during public meetings.  Not actually running a facility which was required. It was doubtful that a lobby group of mostly West Van parents would be given this facility where mostly their own children would get the housing during any formal process.

So this saga continues, out of public view.

---------  
A couple of public hearings, one being the five story replacement for the old Nova Grocery on the corner of Lonsdale and 12th. It is a little too tall, 4 stories seemed right. Not a 12 to 24 monstrosity at least.

A portion of the bonus density was granted by the "Employment Generating" clause. During the 1308 Lonsdale public hearing I questioned this citing the example of the old North Shore News building which still sits mostly empty having generated no new employment.

The presentation site for selling condos  at the Prescott about to close, an office for Blueshore is temporarily there and a temp site for a TD office while they renovations at their main site is all that is there now.  When the last chance signs for the sale of Prescott condos come down soon and their temporary space use ends, it will probably be empty.

I have a feeling that trying extend the business district past 13th is what the problem is.  They are building but people who buy or even rent the space hoping the customers will come, are not even coming themselves.  If this is a factor it is time that Council and staff realize it rather than repeating the same mistake.

There was talk about medical clinic or dentist's office anticipated in that building and the developers are "anticipating" the same for this site.  It would be better if the civic amenity cash was increased for the bonus density  rather than it be based on something that may not happen.  Cash is always better than anticipation.

Councillor Bookham asked if staff has been approached concerning the sale of the Masonic temple site and found out there had been none.

Councillor Heywood asked whether there was an anchor tenant and they do not have one, just anticipation.   Developers who get to this point without an anchor tenant is playing a risky game.

Staff's opinion is that while offices are more vacant, you have to look at the ratio of retail to commercial   Since commercial units are harder to get rented, one should build more of them to give them the proper quota of the formula as that is more important to increase business tenants.  But ever let them talk to business people as I've never heard such nonsense in my life.  Hello, the law of supply and demand!

Councillor Clark pointed out the bonus density increased the size the OCP limits by 40% and when the Council discusses caps in the new bonus density policy, the point will have to be resolved.

The Mayor brings up the same old that so close to Lions Gate Hospital there should be some medical use quickly.  We have heard that many times over the past decade.

It passed with Councillors Bookham and Bell opposed.

Overall, the creation of the Lonsdale canyon is on its way.

A heartfelt statement about a single lot being turned into a duplex which will make a young woman homeless was up next.  Councillors talked more about affordable housing which is now officially an oxymoron, than they talked the project which they all saw as an individual standing in the way of inevitable progress and voted her out on the street. 

Kerry Morris made the Finance meeting snap, crackle and pop a bit which ended with the Chief Administrative Officer think Kerry was wrong and Kerry thinking he had been lied to.

I've got to do a long blog on the Lonsdale Energy Corporation which at least tries to clarify the situation.

Tuesday 8 October 2013

Finance Committee starts up

Did you know that you can go to Council to ask questions about the budget?

Well, not really a budget but a financial plan that assists more spending.  Tonight, they determined the Rec Commission didn't spend all of their allocated funds so had to give back $97,000 but don't worry our Council will not let a penny of your taxes go unspent.  Horror! They could have left it unspent and lowered the spending the following year.

Here is what they will share with the public:

The Presentation:
http://www.cnv.org/attach/2013%2010%2007-FC-PP.pdf

An extremely macro view of the budget:
http://www.cnv.org/attach/2013%2010%2007%20item%2007.pdf

and;

http://www.cnv.org/attach/2013%2010%2007%20item%2007%20attach%2001.pdf

The October 21st Council meeting will continue a series of Finance Committee public hearings where you can have your say.  I was of two people, the past president of the Lower Lonsdale and past candidate for Council in 2008, complained about police response time and questioned on whether the Council had cut the number of officers.  He was assured that was not the case.

I asked whether the tax decrease in the last budget meeting of last year to rebalance the residential and business taxes had partially gone to apartment buildings who are actually hold city issued business licences.  I had called on Council to give more tax relief to actual businessess hoping that actual small businesses would get a higher level of tax relief.  The Council decided in the middle as usual but I was more concerned that the tax relief has partially gone to large corporations rather than struggling small businesses. The Finance Director informed me that apartment buildings although registered as a business are categorized by residential so rather than business so they were not only not getting a tax break but paying more.

Sometimes the question has to be asked even when you don't get the answer you expect.