CITY HALL LISTENS

“People power” is demonstrated all over the world. It started in EDSA in 1986 when Ferdinand Marcos was driven out of Malacanang Palace by a peaceful march of millions of people. Today, all over Africa and the Middle East, we are seeing people clamoring for change in Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Bahrain, and other countries.

We now know how powerful “people power” is when individuals and families unite for a common cause.

YOUR UNITED STANCE COUNTS

Early in the year when Bob Harrison raised alarm about a new sign on Ash Street, it did not take long for Paul Lam, Ellen Leung, Janet Yeung, Sally Kwan, and several other to gather the community together to determine what the “Variance Application” to the city of Richmond is all about. Before long, several letters of concern were sent to the City of Richmond demanding clarification about a plan by the Provincial Rental Housing Corporation to subdivide the 8180 Ash Street property into six (6) lots.

YOUR VOICES WERE HEARD

On Wednesday, February 16, the City Council met to deal with the Variance Application. Several Ash Street neighbors were in attendance. About the meeting, Wayne Craig reports:

• Approval of the application was not granted
  
• Limited access particularly from Dayton Cul de Sac is problematic
  
• Parking is a concern
  
• Consultation/discussion with the community is to be conducted
  
• More detailed plans for the “affordable housing project” should be made public
  

HOLDING ELECTED CITY OFFICIALS ACCOUNTABLE

The Provincial Rental Housing Corporation is a branch of BC HOUSING, (which you will recall approved an application for a “community project” in favor of Turning Point to build a 40-bed institution at this site-which the community unanimously rejected).

What took place at the meeting should send a clear message to the provincial agency that the City of Richmond and its communities are not prepared to entertain development plans, no matter how worthy, without consultation and discussion with the neighborhood.

Through advocacy, we insist on accountability and transparency. We laud of city officials for listening to us.

KEEP ABREAST OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS THAT WILL AFFECT YOUR FUTURE

Choosing where we must live is one of the most important single decisions we make in a lifetime. To have any government agency create development and re-zoning plans that changes our neighborhood without our participation is wrong.

How much do you know about Metro Vancouver’s REGIONAL GROWTH STRATEGY (RGS)?

Richmond Review reported on Council shields Garden City lands from development. We are fortunate to have Councilor Harold Steves represents citizens’ sentiments in defending and preserving agricultural lands against indiscriminate urban development. You may wish to follow up on this critical development and how Metro Vancouver wants to make RGS into law, essentially giving “unelected officials” the power to develop the region in the next 40 years with little public interference. Visit this site to be well informed of the RGS and its implications.

SERIOUS CONSIDERATION – How sincere and transparent is BC Housing?

It would be in the interest of our neighborhood to have 8180 Ash Street developed and used in harmony with the community – of single family home dwellings.

Therefore, should the intent of BC Housing be serious and sincere, it would be ideal as it would relieve everyone of the anxieties that prevailed from three years ago. The sooner this valuable piece of land is utilized in compliance to current zoning bylaws, the better for our peace of mind.

That of course, does not mean that our advocacy no longer matters. It does. For as long as those sitting in council and the management of the city know that our community is united in spirit, wisdom, and resolve, our voices will continue to be heard. This is how we assure accountability and transparency in their governance. What they do and how they do it will impact the community. We want to make sure they remember that. And they will for as long as we remain strong together.

REPRESENTATION AT THE FEB 16 MEETING

The meeting at City Hall to deal with the Variance Application will be held next Wednesday at 3:30 pm. It is 2^nd in the Agenda.

It is important that our community be represented at this meeting to show our concern.

PLEASE SEND YOUR COMMENTS BELOW to indicate that you can be at the Council Chambers.

Please add your thought to the following concerns:

1. How serious and transparent is BC HOUSING about what they have communicated?
2. Public consultation – is the city complying correctly with this process?

When will BC Housing formally make public this “affordable housing project” for scrutiny and consideration?

MORE DETAILS ABOUT ASH ST DEVELOPMENT

BC HOUSING PROJECT FOR ASH STREET DEFINED

Wayne Craig, Program Coordinator – Development, for the City of Richmond contacted us by telephone and email to elaborate on the plans of The Provincial Rental Housing Corporation (which is BC Housing’s land holding company) concerning the Ash St. property.

In the variance application, PRHC provided the city with the following description of its plans:

• Create affordable housing for first time home buyers whose combined income is less than $61,233
• This is to enable families and individuals to purchase a home (in Richmond) at a price that could be debt-service within 30% of their income
• Each house will include secondary suites that could be rented by the homeowners to help with mortgage payments
• Agreements are to be established so that as families and individuals move on, these homes shall continue to be sold according to the “affordable housing” guidelines
• To make these units affordable, BC Housing is contributing the land at no cost
• It will also provide construction financing to develop the project

You can read more about this here:

http://www.richmond.ca/__shared/assets/Rental_DPP_02161129621.pdf

The Agenda for the Variance Application meeting can be viewed here:

http://www.richmond.ca/cityhall/council/agendas/dpp/2011/021611_agenda.htm

Wayne Craig’s call was made as he puts it, “Because of the significant impact of your community initiatives three years ago (concerning this property) and in acknowledgement of your community leadership [with issues affecting our neighborhood].

The City will continue to involve us in this development project through the community consultative process.

NEW SIGN ON ASH STREET DISCONCERTING

CARING CITIZENS GATHER TO DISCUSS THEIR NEW CONCERNS

With a new sign propping up on the property on 8180 Ash Street in Richmond indicating that a DEVELOPMENT VARIANCE PERMIT APPLICATION has been submitted to the City, the community in this family neighborhood raised alarm. “Once bitten twice shy” might describe the mood of many of the citizens since the long drawn but successful skirmish against a planned 40-bed institution at this site three years ago is still fresh in their mind.

BOB was first to take notice and sent pictures of the sign (above) to a few neighbors. PAUL wasted little time in organizing a community discussion. Through email and word of mouth, residents were gathered in a large group on Wednesday, February 2^nd to discuss their concerns. Many had sent letters to City Hall and made phone calls inquiring about “variance permit application”.

ERNIE called DECLAN J ROONEY (604-525-4651) of Hunter Laird Engineering Ltd. which is contracted by BC HOUSING to subdivide the property into 6 lots. Mr. Rooney stated that he is unaware of the details of the project beyond what they are contracted to do.

Perhaps what causes residents apprehension has to do with lack of information. Without any details for the intended use of the subdivision and without any consultation with the community raises alarm.

BILL MCNULTY, City Councilor, was asked by ERNIE if he could meet with the concerned residents to shed light on the matter. Being a caring citizen and supportive of community initiatives, BILL agreed to investigate and report to the group the following night – Chinese New Year.

Setting aside celebration activities, a large group gathered to meet with BILL on THURSDAY, Feb 3.

Fears were allayed with assurances from the Caring Councilor that

1. He is unaware of Turning Point being involve in the project
2. Information about the project needs to be properly disseminated by staff at City Hall
3. He plans to investigated further to make sure that City Hall is fully informed of details about the BC Housing Project
4. The community consultative process is respected and no “intended use” of the project would be permitted without this procedure
5. He is fully supportive of community initiatives and would strongly represent concerns at council

With this, members of the Caring Citizens of Richmond Society happily returned to celebrate the Chinese New Year of the Rabbit.

KEEP INFORMED AND SUPPORT COMMUNITY AFFAIRS

During the two meetings, PAUL circulated a list for attendees to record their contact emails, addresses, and telephone numbers. Residents are asked to keep abreast of happenings in our neighborhood.

Please register and subscribe to this blog so that you will receive critical community updates.

ALSO, please share your thoughts by leaving your comment.

YOUR OPINION COUNTS

At the bottom of this post, there is a “COMMENT” button. It is your turn to express your thoughts, opinion, and observation about the recently concluded elections in Richmond. Please share them with us.

VOTERS APATHY Alive and Well

To those who went to the polling booth and exercised their right of suffrage, you must hold your head up high for doing your duty. You have earned the right to be heard – not only by those you supported but by those who are victorious.

 

Again, as in the last few election dates, Richmond lives up to a sordid reputation as a city of the “silent” majority. With its population of more than 180,000 and people of diverse ethnicity comprising more than 50%, an appalling 13,000+ votes decided the outcome of the election.

 

It is a sad day for democracy. It confirms once more that the democratic process is flawed. When a silent majority abdicates its right and responsibility, it renounces its right to be heard and capitulates to the reign of a few. It must resign itself to eat crumbs on the floor – only should the chosen few decide to spare some generosity.

 

So if you hear anyone grumbling about the results of the election, please ask, “Did you vote!”

 

Those who are still with us and believe that we did not do enough, you are right. So is this end? No, it is just the beginning. This is a wake up call….unless you decide to leave the circus city.

 

It would be fascinating to observe husband confide and take side with ex-wife because current wife is in disagreement; or ex-wife and current wife pushes husband and ex-husband down the stair on a contentious issue. Oh there are other possible combinations. Let the show begin.

 

In case you missed the news about the 2008 election results, here they are:

 

Harold STEVES	13878	ELECTED
Sue HALSEY-BRANDT	12952	ELECTED
Linda BARNES	12734	ELECTED
Bill McNULTY	12480	ELECTED
Greg HALSEY-BRANDT	12295	ELECTED
Derek DANG	11789	ELECTED
Ken JOHNSTON	10832	ELECTED
Evelina HALSEY-BRANDT	10252	ELECTED

 

For mayor:

 

Malcolm BRODIE	19694	ELECTED
Ivan GERLACH	5207
Wei Ping CHEN	1811

 

Folks, enjoy your Sunday brunch while you can….if you can.

 

Just hope that three years will come fast enough. At least that gives us 1000 days head start to wake up the silent majority…… if the great earthquake does not wipe Richmond off the map; if the Musqueams have not sold the Garden City Lands to developers; if businesses between Westminster Hwy and River Road have not yet all filed for bankruptcy; if the Canada Line turnstiles prove to be effective barrier to dissuade criminal elements from finding a niche in the silent circus city…. Oh, so many IFS.

 

Oh, one last thing. At least god only got 6082 votes. It could have been worst!

YOU HOLD THE KEY to Richmond’s Future

THANK YOU FOR SHARING OUR THOUGHTS

This may be our last post before Voting Day. After Saturday, we might celebrate the establishment of a reformed council or …..

…. we might start looking at migrating to Cuba. At least it is warm there.

It has been a tough three weeks devoted to evaluating the qualifications and backgrounds of candidates to come up with a slate that may serve the people of Richmond well. It cannot compare with the patience and endurance of those demonstrating against injustices in China for the persecution of the Falun Gong, but it is similar – we are serving a cause – that of preserving the liveability of Richmond.

CARING CITIZENS OF RICHMOND – NOT A SINGLE ISSUE

Many are saying that Caring Citizens of Richmond Society is only interested in keeping Turning Point away from Richmond. That is so far from the truth. Yes, we worked, studied, researched, and spent great time and energy, as Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s famous detective Sherlock Holmes would have probably done to solve a difficult mystery, to foil an attempt by Miss Plant and the BC government to spend $6 million dollars of taxpayers’ money into a pseudo-treatment recovery center on Ash Street. And we continue to be a watchdog for any such recurrence in the future.

However, as an advocacy group, our mission is to keep Richmond a safe, prosperous, and enjoyable place for families to live, raise children, and retire.

Therefore, while we are vigilant against the proliferation of drug dealings, gang violence, drug-related crimes and deaths, we are greatly concerned of social, fiscal, and economic accountability that shape the future of the city. No one has a crystal ball to the future and economic pundits will say the same: the consequences of the sum total of social, fiscal, and economic activities at any given moment cannot be immediately measured….not until many months or years later.

In other words, the acts and fiscal policies of a city government will significantly impact the future. Thus, the sacred responsibility of those with powers to enact is to respect and value the general well-being of the people, first and foremosts, not only today but for generations to come.

The rapid expansion of the city, the exaggeration of taxes and spending, the densification plans of the present council, is making Richmond a Mecca for wealthy developers, destroying parklands, and putting businesses in the brink of bankruptcy. The Mayor and the Council’s favorite buzzword is “sustainability” in an effort to rationalize their course of action. Sustain what, my foot!

I guess that is why I like Anna Bloomfield (Refer to her statement) and Ken Johnston.

WHAT ABOUT HAROLD STEVES?

 

 

 

Harold is in our slate because of his extensive experience and genuine concern for our city. He is outspoken about the Garden City Land issue. He was the pioneer in the creation of the Agricultural Land Reserve. You can find out more about him here: http://www.richmond.ca/cityhall/council/members/steves.htm. Everyone already knows that “Steveston” was named after his family, one of the first founding families in Richmond. You can also view his history here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Steves.

DUE FOR AN HONORABLE RETIREMENT FROM COUNCIL

Harold has endeared himself to many of us for his service and dedication. However, some of us believe that he should step down and help shape future leaders of the city. When he retires from council, we do not expect him to fade quietly in the sunset. No sir. He has that firebrand and energy that will keep him active in particular, to work for the preservation of agricultural lands anywhere in BC. BUT LET VOTERS DECIDE.

 

 

 

ANNA BLOOMFIELD & KEN JOHNSTON

I’d like to quote what they said as to why we should vote for them:

From Anna Bloomfield:

“My husband and I chose to raise our 4 children in Richmond 27 years ago.  We have seen an accelerated rate of growth in that time and I believe that we should be looking much farther into our future – not just up until the Olympics or the next 10 years.  We need to make sure that the next generations will be able to afford to live in their own community and that we will be able to provide the services which they will require including public safety, health care facilities, school spaces and a clean community.

We MUST also invest more in Youth Programs which begin at an early age and continues through adolescence, which will keep our children off the streets and away from the lure of gangs and youth violence.  This is crime prevention at its most basic form.”

From Ken Johnstone:

“I believe that in these uncertain Economic times the City of Richmond is going to need Councillors that have the ability to provide greater fiscal governance. Continually going to the residents and businesses and asking for huge tax increases is not the answer, nor is it fair. Public safety is a huge issue, Police/ Crime and Fire Rescue. Current Councillors are constantly quoting crime stats saying crime is down. I believe they are out of touch with reality and certainly serious crime and gang activity is in the headlines almost every day. Protecting our single family neighborhoods is critical because there has been a shift away from this by the current Council. It is important for livability and the environment. As President of Canada’s only carbon neutral freight/ courier company I have spent the last 5 years in the sustainability movement learning about the importance of the ground we live on.

I ask for your support because Richmond will be facing difficult issues in the coming years and I believe we need a Council with the experience and back ground to provide leadership on the issues.”

PLEASE GO OUT AND VOTE AND REFER YOUR FRIENDS TO THIS SITE. We owe that much to our children and the future.

THE LEAST FORTUNATE – First to suffer

The consequences of a fat, insensitive, high-maintenance government

Cindy works in a restaurant. She smiles. Takes orders. Chats with the cook. Brings out the food. It is a tough job being on her feet all day and earning minimum wage. At least some customers are good enough to leave some tips, but that she shares with the others…and the cook. Before going home, she drops by the grocery store for some food to cook and serve to her family. Then there are the dishes and laundry to take care of. Exhausted, she turns the TV on.  She scans the channels and chooses “Sex and the city” instead of watching a hotly contested debate at the City Council on Channel 4. She falls asleep. That is the story of her life.

It’s Saturday. Someone knocks on her door and ask her to go out and vote. She hesitates. It is her day off and she knows nothing about politics. Grudgingly, she goes. Before they get to the polling station, she asks, “Who are we going to vote for?”

This is probably why someone wrote that “Democracy does not work”. M. Gregory Mankiw writes “Maybe he watched a baseball game instead of the debates. Maybe he is bored silly with all the talk of targeted tax cuts, privatized social security, and campaign finance reform. Maybe he’s as ignorant about public policy as those focus groups of undecided voters that are the media’s latest darling.”

There are thousands like Cindy whose focus is earning a living, providing for family. They are the ones who are first to suffer in an economic turmoil; the first to be laid off as a consequence of imprudent city policies adopted negligently with no vision of long-term outcomes. Yet the absence of intellectual ability to discern this situation and their scant knowledge lead them to either apathy or at best, “random” choices on the ballot based on faint recollection of signs along the road or what they happen to read in newspapers.

This increases the probability of WRONG CHOICES being made – the ironic evidence that democracy does not work. Because if it does, the most disadvantaged should be the most protected.

But incumbents already know that and the smart others with the money have themselves built more signs and larger posters. Imagine getting elected not because of heart and intellect but because of money and popularity! Does that make sense?

That is why we, caring citizens, must take action and bring fiscal, economic, and social accountability at city hall. We must help protect the ordinary Cindys in our midst. They are the most vulnerable. They are the ones without any choice when tough times come…and they are coming. It is a certainty.

Non-performing members of the city council must go. New brilliant and insightful individuals must take their place and shake up a high-maintenance civic government and bring it to its knees to start working for the public rather than for a select few with fat bank accounts.

GO VOTE THIS SATURDAY. Most importantly, help Cindy make an informed choice.

WAKE UP CALL FOR ALL PEOPLE OF RICHMOND

INFORMED CHOICE for THE BENEFITS OF MANY

As I read the Richmond News editorial and the advertisement by the Firefighters Association of Richmond, I begin to shudder. I stated earlier (right after the close of nominations) that groups concerned only of their self interest will be campaigning hard for their “candidates”. Do they have the welfare of every citizen of Richmond in mind? Are they campaigning for the candidates whose goal is for the betterment of the city and the future? Did they evaluate the effectiveness of governance of the incumbents they want to “rehire”?

In business, when executives make bad decisions that bring the company close to the brink of failure, THEY ARE FIRED and REPLACED.

On Saturday, November 15, 2008, the power of your one vote carries that incredible muscle to FIRE and HIRE the leaders of this city. PLEASE VOTE and take 20 – 30 neighbors with you.

GREED AND SELF-INTEREST

Take for example the Firefighters Association. At their All Candidates Meeting, the issues they raised were all concerning their benefits. They are in the midst of a “renegotiation” of their contract which, anyone can guess, has to do with salaries and benefits and a larger budget. Sure, we want a safe city. We want a well-equipped emergency team that can respond to simultaneous crises in the city.

But this election is not all about emergency preparedness. There are many more factors that affect citizens – such as the CRIME, DENSIFICATION, BUSINESS GROWTH, ECONOMIC & FISCAL ACCOUNTABILITY, ENVIRONMENT, ARTS & CULTURE, and most of all managing the city so that families are safe from harm, earnings are sufficient and not shackled by high taxes due to a “high-maintenance” city, children can walk to and from school without fear, and wage earners are not exposed to the risk of termination because their employers must close shop. THOSE ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT RESPONSIBILITIES of the civil servants we would HIRE this Saturday.

SHAME ON RICHMOND NEWS

The Richmond News, a local newspaper, is suppose to be OBJECTIVE and not BIASED. What a joke! In their editorial “Who should I vote for”, they published a pseudo-intellectual assessment of candidates from a panel. Guess who? Does the term “SELF INTEREST GROUP” now rings a bell? Read who comprise this “panel” and you will know what I mean.

CHOICE FOR MAYOR

I must agree on one opinion. In terms of overall qualification, Mayor Brodie’s opponents would be hard-pressed to unseat him. Be that as it may, I am casting a symbolic vote for Ivan Gerlach.  Mr. Gerlach reminds me of a Philippine President, Ramon Magsaysay. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramon_Magsaysay)  Mr. Magsaysay, unfortunately died in office in a plane crash. He was a common man who travelled using public buses. He was available to the people and had the masses’ interests at hand. He shunned bodyguards and lavish parties. He restored faith in the government and was loved by the people. Mr. Gerlach is a common man, a baker, who rises early to be at work at 3 am so that thousands of people all over BC can have warm fresh bread on their breakfast table. If all Canadians are like him, our country would be prosperous.

WHY AND HOW WE SELECTED CANDIDATES OF CHOICE

CCRS researched the background of each candidate. We asked why we should vote for them. We listened to them speak at all candidates meetings. We interviewed those we shortlisted as our choice candidates. We have no axe to grind. All we want is a safe city where we can work, play, share our rich culture and heritage, raise and educate our children and be able to live here for the rest of our lives.

Can we expect this now in Richmond? Not the way the present council has governed. (See earlier post about “Performance of Current Council”)

Four of the firefighters’ choices (Chen, Jampolsky, McNulty, Steves) are identical to ours. They support the other incumbents for obvious reasons. We will not dignify their “other choice” by making any further comment. You can read about him on our post: “The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly”.

Firefighers’ Slate	CCRS’ Choice Candidates
MAYOR	MAYOR
MALCOLM BRODIE	IVAN GERLACH*
COUNCILORS	COUNCILORS
LINDA BARNES	GARY  CROSS
SUE HALSEY BRANDT	KIICHI KUMAGAI
EVELINA HALSEY BRANDT	ANNA BLOOMFIELD
RICHARD LEE	JIAJIAN CHENG
CYNTHIA CHEN	CYNTHIA CHEN
HOWARD JAMPOLSKY	HOWARD JAMPOLSKY
BILL MCNULTY	BILL MCNULTY
HAROLD STEVES**	HAROLD STEVES**
KEN JOHNSTON**	KEN JOHNSTON**
**has given a lot to Richmond; due for honorable retirement from council	*Symbolic choice ** Alternate choice

REFORM THE RICHMOND COUNCIL?

HOW WOULD YOU RATE THE PRESENT COUNCIL’S PERFORMANCE?

I read with great interest and agreement the points brought up by Jim Wright (Chair of the Garden City Coalition) – that there is a need to reform the Richmond council. However, as explosive the Garden City Lands issue is in this election, it is not the only reason for reform.

 

There is one other.  I would like to identify it as “fiscal, economic, and social accountability”.

 

A civic government is responsible to guide the city through good and bad economic times; to make sure that people can stay in their homes safe from harm, in particular, from the dangers of drug related crimes maintain and grow their careers; raise and educate their children; contribute to their community; and enjoy their existence.  They are the foundation of a strong and healthy society.

 

How has the present council fared in this regard? The answer lies in measuring the level of stability/instability in the city during the last three to six years but that may be too technical for the layman. Perhaps the easiest way to rank the present council’s level of performance is to ask the ordinary Jack Smith or Ken Chan the following questions:

 

1)       What are your prospects of continuing to live in Richmond in the next 3 – 5 years?

2)       Does your employment income allow you to support your family and pay your taxes?

3)       Do you think your children are receiving excellent guidance and academic prospects at school?

4)       Can you afford to dine out occasionally and entertain families and friends?

5)       Do you feel a lot safer today compared to 6 years ago?

6)       Is your feeling of general well-being better today than 6 years ago?

So, what do you think are the answers? Let us look at some facts. How much more today are you paying in property taxes and utility bills? If you are in business and occupy premises between Westminster Highway and River Road, how do you feel about the monstrous assessment in 2008-2009 that raised your taxes greater than 150% (because the city washed it hands when the provincial government declared that your building is now zoned as a “prime high density residential” zone although you use it as a warehouse.) How long can you stay in business? How many employees do you have that you will lay off in the next 3 – 5 years?

 

Does it take you longer now to go to work or school as you navigate through construction on city streets? How many traffic violation tickets do you receive because you fail to notice “a new traffic sign”?

 

Do you send you children to Richmond Schools or do they go to Crofton House and St. Georges? How much have you spent on theft deterrent devices for your car and your home?

 

Do you feel happy and content enough with what is going on in Richmond today that makes you feel ecstatic to retire here close to where your family and children are, or, will you be forced to locate elsewhere?

 

Like it, understand it, or not, global economic instability will have its ripple effect felt here way beyond the $10 million Olympic party. Jack Smith and Ken Chan would be faced with the consequences of a tax-hungry, free-spending city administration which is the architect of densification that will change the face of Richmond forever.

 

Now what is your verdict? Has the present council performed well with respect to their fiscal, social, and economic responsibilities?

 

You are their employer and you have an opportunity on Saturday, November 15, to hire back the city’s brilliant architects, or fire them for inefficiency. Cast your ballot.