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.

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.  

What the heck is a BIA?

A Business Improvement Area.  The City Council has given the Lower Lonsdale Business Association $120,000 to help start one after a required referendum failed to approve one.

A BIA is a group of businesses in a defined area who vote to be taxed by the central organization.  Of course, if 51% vote to be taxed the Council orders everyone to pay.  What did the LLBA do when denied to right to to tax the unwilling?  They changed the boundaries so that next time they could win.  At least those in the deleted areas can't be taxed there will be another vote where this can be stopped.

So they went to Council for funding to continue their crusade to tax the unwilling. Council, of course was right into the concept since they make their living overtaxing people, gave them $60,000 to fund a more professional campaign.  Tonight they came back for another $60,000.

Councillor Bookham asked about attendance at recent meetings.  I got the feeling an implication was there was not even a lot of support in their audience.  Someday Councillors will ask honest and blunt questions when they know want the answer is at the start or let the public know what is really going on.

The proper way performing their task is a form a voluntary organization which of course they did with the Lower Lonsdale Business Association.  They should not become unelected people taxing the unwilling.  Business owners that oppose this should join the LLBA to stop this stupidity, the voters should stop Councillors who want to hand out taxing authority to their proxies so they can deny the tax increase.

The day the Monorail salesman came to North Van

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEZjzsnPhnw

It felt like this last night as I sat through Rogers Brooks' presentation on branding with the new waterfront. It was reported on the Voices website that there was a strong feeling of "an Amway conference or some kind of cult event" taking place.

We never met Roger Brooks but an showman playing the role of Roger Brooks, a hippie who worked on the Bee Gees tour. He played the role of the anti-politican and anti-populist. It probably goes over well in the hinterland of the USA where he usually works. It felt like Roger was channeling the spirit of Stalin as he railed against public having a  real say. I had the "monorail" song going through my head during the long bits. Maybe Roger has forgotten we have this little thing called elections in his long time in the United States.   If the public doesn't like what is being done, they will toss out the Council and put people in place who will change the script that they're being told to clap for.

It seemed out of place as Roger spoke like there was a blank slate we would fill when we all know that staff has a plan almost done already.  Darryl and others have already decided on the script, they just need us to clap without questioning anything.

But at the core of it is good as it leans heavily on whatever is proposed going through a rigorous feasibility study.  The Council has already placed the new museum here, in a place where it will dominate the site and stated it will not be subsidized more than the current museum. So any businesses that can be convinced to locate here will have to provide a large input to the tax base that will cover the losses of the museum and what ever other money losing attractions Darryl has up his sleeve.

I bet that the old Site 8 and a 400 foot tower will raise back up at the end of this scheme with a lot of "amenity" money attached to at least move the Waterfront project forward. Millennium was forced to sell off their share of the land on Site 8 when their Olympic village scheme failed and they had to go out of business.   The City of Vancouver picked up the property and sold it to the City of North Vancouver who is free to re-sell it to a developer. I bet factions of the De Coitiis family will rear it's greedy head to lead this project whether it is Onni, Pinnacle or Amacon. 

Trouble follows this family who are locked in a Shakespearean tragedy of their own http://www2.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=fca1081a-8ba6-4568-a42c-e23962a6d3bc

The bottom line is that this must be a money producing enterprise for North Vancouver not just for developers as usual.  Not counting any temporary revenue from future huge towers that the usual suspects will try to build while we're humming "monorail" or a new version "aquarium."  Come on folks, sing it along with Darryl and Roger - aquarium ... AQUARIUM.  Sounds better than Casino, doesn't it?

Roger gave a different website address for the survey but I think it's the same one. It does seem rather shorter and unsubstantial than what Roger talked about in his sales pitch but that's probably just the free Kool Aid wearing off.

http://www.cnv.org/CentralWaterfrontSurvey