Scrap the Stern II

As in all good horror stories, the monster comes back at the end to threaten the good people of the town once again.  Tonight the Flambourgh Head Stern tries to raise from its watery grave to threaten the taxpayers of the City of North Van.

Actually, what it happening is an "inside hockey" game with a double rescinding of motions being proposed.  REF!

On the 9th of September, Council passed the following motion in open Council as per the Provincial law, the discussion and report was in-camera.

11. Security of City Properties

Moved by Councillor Clark, seconded by Councillor Keating

THAT Council direct staff to proceed with disposing of the stern and the engine of the Flambourgh Head and to proceed with the removal of the hazardous materials;

THAT funding of up to $250,000 (Funding Appropriation #1327) be appropriated from the "Lower Lonsdale Amenity Reserve Fund" to complete the disposal process;

THAT staff be directed to contact the Artificial Reef Society to investigate the removal of the stern and engine and the associated costs, and if there is no interest from the Artificial Reef Society, that staff proceed with the removal and report back to Council;

AND THAT the report remain In Camera.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

So 5 months later, the stern still sitting there on death row awaiting its execution until the 27th of January when Councillor Bookham submitted a motion that the issue be "revisited".  There is no mention of a "Motion to revisit" in the Council Procedures Bylaw 7590.  A motion can only be reconsidered during the same meeting or rescinded in the following meeting. This motion should never have been considered, it was clearly a motion to rescind and out of order having negated the motion of the 9th of September.  It read:

21.  Flamborough Head

Moved by Councillor Bookham seconded by Councillor Bell

BE IT RESOLVED THAT the decision to scrap the stern be revisited;

THAT the discussion take place in open Council;

THAT the option of including the stern of the Flamborough Head in Lot 5 of the Pier Development area be referred to Roger Brooks and the Brand Development Team for their input and comments for further consideration by Council;

AND THAT staff report back on options and the financial implications for preserving the stern.

At the last meeting of 24 February, the following motion (active clauses only) was  passed to reinstate the original motion:

19. Flamborough Head Options and Costs 

Moved by Councillor Keating, seconded by Councillor Buchanan

THAT Council receive the information regarding the costs associated with the Flamborough Head;

THAT staff report back with options for preserving of a piece of metal from the stern of the Flamborough Head, to create a commemorative piece to be situated in the Shipyards Precinct;

Councillor Bell and Councillor Bookham are recorded as voting contrary to the motion.

Tonight we have yet again a motion to rescind the prior motion, at least in order this time except that you can't keep repeating a failed motion within 6 months to stop Councillors who can't accept the failure of a motion but since the Chair accepted an out of order motion he kind of reset the clock on this.

10. Flamborough Head

Submitted by Councillor Bookham

BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City rescind the motion to scrap the stern and direct staff to report back on the various options integrating the stern in the building proposed for the east side of Lot 5 or at some location at the Shipyards.

Councillor Bookham has a snarky motion that will be ruled out of order or just fail with the lack of seconder about forcing the City to return funds on the basis that it basis that the funds were granted by various people on the basis that the funds were spent on preserving the stern.  The City spent over far more funds than granted for attempts to preserve the stern.  It's is if Councillor Bookham is viewing the stern as her legacy to her time on Council which is soon to end.

The issue of the Provincial's grant is one constantly misused by Bookham and her municipal political organisation, Voices.  The left over grant from the never to be National Maritime Museum is to be used for maritime heritage, not exclusively for the Stern.  Aside from the over a million dollars wasted in attempts to preserve the stern, the funds spent on the crane and other items. The friends of the museum will come to the city shortly expecting millions of dollars for their new museum.  Where does Voices and the other folks in the Save the Stern movement think the funds to give to the new maritime museum is coming from.  That's right the left over provincial grant money.   So in the choice between the stern or the new museum, I'm picking the museum.  We'll see what the Council picks later tonight.

UPDATE:  The vote is done and for the second time tonight is Rod Clark who despite the oncoming election decided to actually be "the guardian of North Van taxpayers" again.