BC Municipal Elections -- Oct 20, 2018

[Traum]

The municipal elections will soon be among us, and I still have no @#$(@)#(% clue on who I should vote for -- the candidates all seem bad / questionable in one way or another.

The race in Vancouver seems rather confusing to me, and the one in Richmond seems like at least some of the candidates do not have their first loyalty to the local residents.

Any insights on how we are supposed to vote when the candidates all suck?

Ugh...

[CivicBlues]

God damn it's been 4 years already since I created this?
https://www.revscene.net/forums/6985...15-2014-a.html

My advice remains, vote the incumbent bums out!!

[Traum]

Well CB, a lot of the incumbents are already on their way out this time around.

The hipster bum at the CoV City Hall already knows his time is up, and he ain't gonna win again even if he tries.

I never liked Malcolm Brodie, but I would dread the dubious Chinese lawyer even more given her horrible track record at managing / overseeing her own law firm.

I think Corrigan is a stubborn idiot, and it seems like he has really pissed off a lot of people this time with the renoviction plans around Metrotown.

As I have posted here on the forum before, I have butted heads with Port Moody's Mike Clay in the past, and I hope the new young challenger will give him a run for his money. I agree with the kid's plans and platform more, but I think the Port Moody residents will not be aware of the impact and damages in Clay's plans until they reveal themselves when everything is set in stone.

[68style]

Richmond is at a crisis point in my opinion, lifetime resident of the city... and almost as unbelievably as Trump becoming president, this racist criminal bitch is gaining popularity there:

https://www.richmond-news.com/news/r...ety-1.23427997

If she gets in I'm officially moving... the videos she plays at her speeches about Chinese people needing better representation in Richmond because things are unfair for them there? What a joke.

Nevermind the fact she's a criminal who magically makes millions appear/disappear at her whim... yah nothing corrupt there. She says everything is fine because she paid everyone back from insurance and her own pocket??? Where did she get $7.5 million dollars from out of nowhere? Fucking unbelievable, I seriously doubt any "insurance" policy she had covers employees supposedly taking the money when she failed to put any safeguards in place either.

[Traum]

Can't agree more about what you've said regarding this Hong Guo. It never fails to amaze me how anyone can vote for someone with a history as dubious as she is. We know integrity is not a strong suit in most politicians, but to have dealings as quesitonable as she does -- my goodness... how can anyone still vote for her???

I am totally expecting a glut of Chinese voters to blindly support her simply because she is Chinese. That is not only a disgusting thought, it is also an insult to democracy because that very democratic process is essentially used to defeat itself.

Originally Posted by 68style

Richmond is at a crisis point in my opinion, lifetime resident of the city... and almost as unbelievably as Trump becoming president, this racist criminal bitch is gaining popularity there:

https://www.richmond-news.com/news/r...ety-1.23427997

If she gets in I'm officially moving... the videos she plays at her speeches about Chinese people needing better representation in Richmond because things are unfair for them there? What a joke.

Nevermind the fact she's a criminal who magically makes millions appear/disappear at her whim... yah nothing corrupt there. She says everything is fine because she paid everyone back from insurance and her own pocket??? Where did she get $7.5 million dollars from out of nowhere? Fucking unbelievable, I seriously doubt any "insurance" policy she had covers employees supposedly taking the money when she failed to put any safeguards in place either.

[68style]

The craziest thing in the article to me is that she created a trust account with $189 million dollars in it after the fact... who the hell and where the hell does anyone get $189 million dollars from??? What kind of clients does she have that are in those kind of figures???... scary shit man. And her posts on her Facebook page are talking about affordable housing... lol...

[Mr.HappySilp]

I just move from Burnaby to Coquitlam so do I vote for BBY or COQ?

[Traum]

68style,

I have been on-and-off following this Hong Guo, and this latest article you posted is nothing short of fantastical. Literally every allegation in those paragraphs are nothing short of "beyond my wildest dreams".

- NSF from her trust accounts
- failing to report that funds shortage for over 2 yrs
- giving 120 pre-signed cheques to a non-lawyer for her trust accounts and permitted a non-lawyer to issue 95 cheques drawing $53 million from the trust accounts “without proper supervision”
- using debit memos when the rules specifically says you can't do that

Everything is like a giant

I have been reading this book regarding the state-backed efforts to invade Australia by the Mainland Chinese government, in the last little while, and while I have no concrete proof whatsoever, I would not at all be surprised to see a similar thing occurring here in BC / Canada. In fact, I think it would be pretty stupid and naive to think that nothing of this sort is happening in Canada, esp when where have already been obvious signs of it happening -- at least in Ontario.

[CivicBlues]

Funny, I just saw this guy's poster up in a Chinese restaurant:

City Council - Nomination Candidates

Is this the first Vancouver City Council candidate with a Mainlander name?

[Traum]

Originally Posted by Mr.HappySilp

I just move from Burnaby to Coquitlam so do I vote for BBY or COQ?

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/g...ibility-voting

Voter Eligibility
Requirements
In order to be eligible to vote locally as a resident or non-resident property elector, a person must:

Be 18 years of age or older when they register to vote, or 18 years or older on general voting day,
Be a Canadian citizen,
Have been a resident of B. C. for at least six months before they register to vote,
Have either lived or owned property in the jurisdiction in which they intend to vote for at least 30 days before they register to vote, and
Not be disqualified under the Local Government Act, or any other enactment, or by law from voting in a local election

[Mr.HappySilp]

^^ Thanks! Looks like I just pass 30 days. But I personal don't know anyone in Coq lol.

[Bouncing Bettys]

My vote goes to whoever makes it so election signs can only be posted on government property. There are far more effective ways to get your name out there than this trash.

There is or was a massive election sign at the corner of a busy intersection in Aldergrove which was creating a huge blind spot for traffic.

[yray]

vote sims so I don't have to listen to rosemary rocksalt ads

fucking annoying ads

[Traum]

Both Vision and NPA were bankrolled by real estate developers in the past, and now they say they want to strive for housing affordability. Clearly, these parties take the majority of the voters to be iditos -- and I can't really blame them cuz they probably are.

On top of that, the NPA left an opaque impression and a bad taste in the voters mind on how they blocked Hector Bremner and Wai Young from running for the mayoral race.

[mikemhg]

Did you guys not hear some recent concerns from city councilors indicating that most people in the city aren't even aware of an election is happening?

https://globalnews.ca/news/4436857/b...voter-turnout/

This is why we have rampant corruption in Vancouver. This is why Chinese migrants are laundering money at exorbitant levels. This is why real estate developers are running gamut through the city, with developments being approved at levels which makes you simply shake your head in disgust.

We live on Lougheed right before Willingdon, and the road closures, and construction developments in the area are directly affecting our standard of living to a large margin.

People are so apathetic in this city, I honestly think the main reason to this is immigration both externally, and internally within Canada to BC.

I grew up in this city, most of my friends at this point did not, other friends have moved to other Provinces/Countries. I get called a unicorn by people I meet, because I was born here.

This is an example when immigration has a negative affect, because people do not have an affinity or connection to this city to care about its government structure and policies.

This is why these clowns get elected election after election, no one cares, and the only one's that show up to vote are the folks who have a stake in the politics and will benefit from the policies enacted for them and their cronies.

It's a messed up situation on a civic level in this city.

Not sure if people recall the city of Vancouver recently pushing to allow non-Canadian citizens to vote...I wonder why?

[Mr.HappySilp]

You do know that with that area being redevelop they NEED TO CLOSE THE ROADS so they can install better pipes. I mean sure they could not do a thing and then let YOUR HOUSE/UNIT FLOOD due to poor piping. Or would you rather they plan ahead and make sure there no issue with piping/water supply/power supply/ Oh and if you want faster internet most fiber line are install underground.

Also if you want less traffic jam in the future they are going to need to widen the roads so people like you don't complain in the future when you are stuck in traffic.

It will get better for everyone once the work is done. You do know that the city collects a ton of tax from these apartments that's going up right? Also most city have setup in a such a way that with new development the developer have to set aside a set number of units for low incoming family and rental units only, they have to improve the nearby infrastructure to meet the demands of the increase population. Build green space, maybe even reno nearby schools/community centers/clinics/hospital. So all these new/improve infrastructure you get to use too.

[minoru_tanaka]

Originally Posted by Traum

I am totally expecting a glut of Chinese voters to blindly support her simply because she is Chinese. That is not only a disgusting thought, it is also an insult to democracy because that very democratic process is essentially used to defeat itself.

There's people who will blindly vote for, "one of their own", but I really don't think that's problem with chinese people. Most won't bother voting. There's no free gift or cheap eggs at the end of that queue, they're not going to line up

[Tapioca]

Originally Posted by Traum

As I have posted here on the forum before, I have butted heads with Port Moody's Mike Clay in the past, and I hope the new young challenger will give him a run for his money. I agree with the kid's plans and platform more, but I think the Port Moody residents will not be aware of the impact and damages in Clay's plans until they reveal themselves when everything is set in stone.

As a resident of Port Moody and having had the opportunity to watch council debates live, I would beg to differ on your opinion of the two people running for mayor.

What Clay and the other councillors have done is, for the most part, balanced. Single family home owners living in Port Moody will continue to live in their detached homes, while density will increase by Skytrain.

[Traum]

Originally Posted by minoru_tanaka

There's people who will blindly vote for, "one of their own", but I really don't think that's problem with chinese people. Most won't bother voting. There's no free gift or cheap eggs at the end of that queue, they're not going to line up

That depends on how the game is played, and how much involvement "the backers" are willing to put forth. If there is a desire to mobilize the Chinese population, things will be done "to encourage" higher voter participation. This is not new or foreign to the guiding hands behind the scenes at all.

From the reporting of her campaign rally, there is some evidence to suggest that the candidate may be getting "help". How much help is there, and whether that help will continue is another story. If I were one of the backers, I would withdraw my support because this candidate is really turning out to be too much of a basket case.

Originally Posted by Tapioca

As a resident of Port Moody and having had the opportunity to watch council debates live, I would beg to differ on your opinion of the two people running for mayor.

What Clay and the other councillors have done is, for the most part, balanced. Single family home owners living in Port Moody will continue to live in their detached homes, while density will increase by Skytrain.

We would have agree to disagree then. From my previous dealings with Clay, I'm getting the sense that he is very pro-development. He follows procedure alright, but that his exactly what any elected official is supposed to do. Furthermore, precisely because he follows procedure, he will make it a point that City Hall can do as it sees fit when there are no municipal guidelines to bind them.

As the mayor, Clay did not protect my interests as a home owner in Port Moody, nor did he protect the interests of all other residents in my complex. (I think there are 80+ households in my building?) This happened despite an initially massive protest at the City Hall. As the proceedings went on and became longer and more drawn out, weariness set in and the numbers among the protesting residents thinned. There is no doubt that the majority of the affected residents are upset, but they simply didn't have any fight left in them when the process has dragged on for something like 2 years.

All of this is in the municipal records. I will not forgive Clay for siding with the developer instead of protecting the residents interest.

[Tapioca]

Originally Posted by Traum

We would have agree to disagree then. From my previous dealings with Clay, I'm getting the sense that he is very pro-development. He follows procedure alright, but that his exactly what any elected official is supposed to do. Furthermore, precisely because he follows procedure, he will make it a point that City Hall can do as it sees fit when there are no municipal guidelines to bind them.

As the mayor, Clay did not protect my interests as a home owner in Port Moody, nor did he protect the interests of all other residents in my complex. (I think there are 80+ households in my building?) This happened despite an initially massive protest at the City Hall. As the proceedings went on and became longer and more drawn out, weariness set in and the numbers among the protesting residents thinned. There is no doubt that the majority of the affected residents are upset, but they simply didn't have any fight left in them when the process has dragged on for something like 2 years.

All of this is in the municipal records. I will not forgive Clay for siding with the developer instead of protecting the residents interest.

Of course Clay is pro-development - isn't that the point?

Where did you own a unit? The Station? Sonrisa?

[mikemhg]

Originally Posted by Mr.HappySilp

You do know that with that area being redevelop they NEED TO CLOSE THE ROADS so they can install better pipes. I mean sure they could not do a thing and then let YOUR HOUSE/UNIT FLOOD due to poor piping. Or would you rather they plan ahead and make sure there no issue with piping/water supply/power supply/ Oh and if you want faster internet most fiber line are install underground.

Also if you want less traffic jam in the future they are going to need to widen the roads so people like you don't complain in the future when you are stuck in traffic.

It will get better for everyone once the work is done. You do know that the city collects a ton of tax from these apartments that's going up right? Also most city have setup in a such a way that with new development the developer have to set aside a set number of units for low incoming family and rental units only, they have to improve the nearby infrastructure to meet the demands of the increase population. Build green space, maybe even reno nearby schools/community centers/clinics/hospital. So all these new/improve infrastructure you get to use too.

Of course I do, why do you think they need to install new pipes in the first place? Directly because of the new projects all along Lougheed, there is a direct need due to the current and future development. I work in the industry, so I'm certainly aware of this.

This is an issue we've been dealing with in this area for years now in this area, closed roads, traffic changes, at the end of the day it affects our standard of living adversely, this has been brought up quite often in Strata meetings.

Please explain to me all these new "infrastructure" developments you speak of, as I'm certainly not seeing them? Adding an extra traffic light mere meters away from the last traffic light, to appease foot traffic for a newly approved condo, only to add additional time to people's commute?

Look, I'm all for development, but people are experiencing some real headaches around the city as a result of all of these approved projects that are really only serving a small segment of the population in Vancouver. I feel like much of these developments are approved on purely monetary grounds, without further insight on the affect of these projects to local residents.

[Traum]

Originally Posted by Tapioca

Of course Clay is pro-development - isn't that the point?

Where did you own a unit? The Station? Sonrisa?

My unit was at the Station. Another neighbouring building that would be massively affected by the new development was the Lighthouse. Initially, tons of people from both buildings showed up at the council meetings to voice their opposition too.

I am not at all against development, but it needs to be done with a balanced approach. When well over 100 households are first-handedly and dramatically affected by a proposed development, I think their interests and well-being needs to be taken into account. As the mayor, I think Clay's first responsibility should lie with the well being of the residents in his constituency, not looking after the financial interests of a developer. Promoting growth for the mere sake of growth is totally meaningless. Growth should merely be a means to enhance the quality of life for people. To make people sacrifice their quality of life so that growth can be achieved is completely backwards.

For those who are not familiar with the issue at hand, it essentially boils down to a new development in the historic DT Port Moody area where a new development was proposed. If memory is serving me right, it was an issue that had dragged on for over 2 years.

1) Developer wants to build a 7 story building at the bottom of a small hill (Clark & Moody), where the existing zoning only allows for 4.
2) The 2 nearby buildings were both zoned for 4 stories, and were relatively new. At the time, I think my building was only 3 or 4 years old, and the other one was probably 5 - 7 yrs old.
3) The newly drafted Port Moody OCP allowed for 6 story buildings.
4) Residents from the 2 nearby buildings vehemently opposed to the 7 story plans, citing numerous concerns for a decline to their quality of life, financial losses, inconsistency to the neighbourhood and wants to keep the zoning of the new building at 4 stories high.
5) Dragged over a number of committee / council meetings over the aforementioned time span (over 2 years, I think?), City Council turned down the 7 story building application, but approved the zoning change to 6 stories high, which is consistent with the OCP, but against the wishes of the residents who were immediately adjacent to the proposed development.

From Day 1, Clay was supportive of the development, as long as it was consistent with the OCP. As far as I can tell, the opposition from the residents were never a factor to him. And for all that, I will never forgive or support him.

[Mr.HappySilp]

Originally Posted by mikemhg

Of course I do, why do you think they need to install new pipes in the first place? Directly because of the new projects all along Lougheed, there is a direct need due to the current and future development. I work in the industry, so I'm certainly aware of this.

This is an issue we've been dealing with in this area for years now in this area, closed roads, traffic changes, at the end of the day it affects our standard of living adversely, this has been brought up quite often in Strata meetings.

Please explain to me all these new "infrastructure" developments you speak of, as I'm certainly not seeing them? Adding an extra traffic light mere meters away from the last traffic light, to appease foot traffic for a newly approved condo, only to add additional time to people's commute?

Look, I'm all for development, but people are experiencing some real headaches around the city as a result of all of these approved projects that are really only serving a small segment of the population in Vancouver. I feel like much of these developments are approved on purely monetary grounds, without further insight on the affect of these projects to local residents.

From the stretch of Lougheed hwy and willingdon all the way to Lougheed and Holdom there is going to be a ton of new development. Concord is planning to have 8 to 12 high raise up around Lougheed and Douglas and there are other development going up. All those little car shops, office/stores along side those area is going to be apartments/townhomes in the next 10 to 25 years. So I wouldn't say it only serve a small segment of population. By the end Amazing Brentwood, Concord Brentwood, Solo, Glmore is all done in that area is going to bring a tons of people (much more like DT in Burnaby) so many 8 to 10k people?

I am surprise you aren't seeing the development. Just look at Amazing brentwood. I think first tower is almost done(at least you can see is pretty high) That mall is being redevelope for years already. How about Solo 1 and 2 and 3 and Wholesfood? Then around Dougls and Lougheed there are already a few apartments. Fences have been put all over that area.

Once the area is fully developed it will even have more towers than metrotown have currently. Brentwood mall is also said to have a theater, playdium style arcade, grocery store and of coz lot so high raise (Amazing brentwood is said to have 12 towers in total I think but I could be wrong.)

Then Metrotwn will be in development in the next 20 to 40 years. Stripping the mall down and basically having smaller stores and then high raise on them (much like Marine gateway) I am sure the flagship store will still be there Superstore, T&T, sliver city, wal mart etc etec..... Food might not be there instead it will be open space outsdie (at least looking at the early photos of the development) All the low raise around that area is going to get turn into high raise (already happening and a ton of these low raise are bought by developers already they are just waiting for the lease to run out).

Concord Metro I think is having its VIP sale by end of year price should be at least $1200 to $1400sq. It will be around sears parking where the first tower to go up.

I haven't been following Coquitlam development but it looks like Lougheed mall will have around 10 or more apartments once is all done. Next area of development should be the Burquitlam area (There is already a few high raise and a bunch of low raise and townhomes). I am pretty the strip mall next to the skytrain is going to get turn into some sort osf mall/high raise. area. Coq center will most likely get redevelop in like 30 years form now(wild guess lol).
I mean Coq center is way too big for its own good and the parking lot is huge!

[Tapioca]

Originally Posted by Traum

My unit was at the Station. Another neighbouring building that would be massively affected by the new development was the Lighthouse. Initially, tons of people from both buildings showed up at the council meetings to voice their opposition too.

I am not at all against development, but it needs to be done with a balanced approach. When well over 100 households are first-handedly and dramatically affected by a proposed development, I think their interests and well-being needs to be taken into account. As the mayor, I think Clay's first responsibility should lie with the well being of the residents in his constituency, not looking after the financial interests of a developer. Promoting growth for the mere sake of growth is totally meaningless. Growth should merely be a means to enhance the quality of life for people. To make people sacrifice their quality of life so that growth can be achieved is completely backwards.

For those who are not familiar with the issue at hand, it essentially boils down to a new development in the historic DT Port Moody area where a new development was proposed. If memory is serving me right, it was an issue that had dragged on for over 2 years.

1) Developer wants to build a 7 story building at the bottom of a small hill (Clark & Moody), where the existing zoning only allows for 4.
2) The 2 nearby buildings were both zoned for 4 stories, and were relatively new. At the time, I think my building was only 3 or 4 years old, and the other one was probably 5 - 7 yrs old.
3) The newly drafted Port Moody OCP allowed for 6 story buildings.
4) Residents from the 2 nearby buildings vehemently opposed to the 7 story plans, citing numerous concerns for a decline to their quality of life, financial losses, inconsistency to the neighbourhood and wants to keep the zoning of the new building at 4 stories high.
5) Dragged over a number of committee / council meetings over the aforementioned time span (over 2 years, I think?), City Council turned down the 7 story building application, but approved the zoning change to 6 stories high, which is consistent with the OCP, but against the wishes of the residents who were immediately adjacent to the proposed development.

From Day 1, Clay was supportive of the development, as long as it was consistent with the OCP. As far as I can tell, the opposition from the residents were never a factor to him. And for all that, I will never forgive or support him.

It's a bit rich to claim that a loss of views of the water and mountains is tantamount to a loss of quality of life. Because, when I heard about application for Platform, that's what it was. It was reported as such in the Tri City News, whose reporters tend to be sympathetic to those who oppose density.

So, are you saying that a small number of residents should have a veto over a development proposal that complies with the OCP? It's not like Aragon asked for an amendment to the OCP. The OCP was passed after consultation with the residents of the entire city, not just some home owners who happen to live in adjacent buildings.

Clay is hardly the elder statesman of mayors in Metro Vancouver, but to me, it's a bit unfair to fault decision-makers for making decisions that comply with the OCP just because you happen to not like the OCP itself.

[Traum]

Hmm... So do you ever go hiking? I used to before I got tied down in life. I do it because seeing the waters and the mountains makes me feel good. In other words, being able to enjoy those views improves the quality of my life. Being able to do the same at home serves a similar purpose. Given 2 real estate properties that are completely identical, but one has a view of the waters and the mountains while the other doesn't, why else do you think the unit with the view is worth more?

And then that is the other thing -- the new building blocks my view of the waters, so my unit has just lost value. I can certainly be bought (to shut up) if Aragon were willing to compensate me (and other affected owners) for my loss, but that didn't happen. When my money is on the line, of course I am going to come out to fight and defend it. When your money is put on the line like that as well, I suspect you'd probably do the same too.

When the ordeal first started, a hapless chap has just purchased a north-facing unit at the 5th floor at my building. One of the reasons he bought was because he loved the view. When he first learned about the Platform project about 3 weeks after he moved in, I saw his jaw dropped to the ground. He was going to completely lose his view -- a view that he paid good money for.

And that's just me and the others at the Station. The folks at the Lighthouse have it worse. Everyone at the top floor loses a good chunk (or all) of their sunlight and pretty much all of their eastward view at their rooftop patios. Instead, they are rewarded with a view of a giant big wall that is 2 stories higher than their building. Again, those folks paid good money for that feature in their building. Had the same zoning bylaw remained for the Platform building, the new building would also only be limited to 4 stories, and thus the impact to the Lighthouse residents would not be too great.

The OCP is the OCP, but IMO, new developments need to take into account any negative effects it might have on those who are immediately nearby. In the case of this Platform building, I think the negative impact is HUGE on its neighbours. Does 100+ households (between the 2 affected buildings) seem like a small number of residents to you? There is the quality of life aspect, and there is the financial loss aspect. AFAIK, no residents in either building received any sort of compensation from anyone.

If you ask me whether a small number of residents should have a veto power over a development proposal that complies with the OCP, I am going to instead ask you whether a generalized policy should apply its broad stroke power to inflict losses on a good number of residents in specific situations.

Also, perhaps you missed a point in my previous post -- Aragon did ask for permission to build 7 stories even though the OCP only allowed for 6. Do you think they didn't know the OCP only allowed for 6? It's just that they got turned down.

I can tell you though -- I enjoy this discussion far more than the ones I had at the council meetings.

Originally Posted by Tapioca

It's a bit rich to claim that a loss of views of the water and mountains is tantamount to a loss of quality of life. Because, when I heard about application for Platform, that's what it was. It was reported as such in the Tri City News, whose reporters tend to be sympathetic to those who oppose density.

So, are you saying that a small number of residents should have a veto over a development proposal that complies with the OCP? It's not like Aragon asked for an amendment to the OCP. The OCP was passed after consultation with the residents of the entire city, not just some home owners who happen to live in adjacent buildings.

Clay is hardly the elder statesman of mayors in Metro Vancouver, but to me, it's a bit unfair to fault decision-makers for making decisions that comply with the OCP just because you happen to not like the OCP itself.