A Langley public forum for political & editorial opinions, discussion and news. Our priority is to share information and discussion about the community with the community. Bob Richter is the sole Editor, publisher and administrator of LFP. Langley Free Press Home Page
Sunday, April 30, 2006
President of Afghanistan Offers Olive Branch to Taliban
Interesting, why doesn't the Canadian Press report the fact that President Karzai is offering an olive branch to the Taliban (who by the way now call themselves freedom fighters)? Is it at all possible to 'give peace a chance'? Are the Taliban a group that can be reasoned with? Are they that big a threat to suddenly elicit an appeal to consider peace from President Karzai? Certainly not the impression our western leaders have been giving us. The impression we are being given in the West is that they are just a small bunch of loose terrorists that we are just mopping up. What is really motivating President Karzai to ask the Taliban to accept the olive branch? This seems like a pretty dramatic appeal. Why?....
Saturday, April 29, 2006
Fallen Soldier's Dad Critical Of PM Harper
Letter To The Editor - April 29, 2006 - From Peter Adamovich - Re: School Closure Procedures Review
Editor
I'm very glad the school district will review their closure procedures. The current process fails to inform all parties of the ultimate goals of closure.
During the South Carvolth review process, district administration informed trustees and parents that the reasons were not financial, which is good because closing the school would have recovered less than 1% of the district's overall budget, even if all the students had stayed in the district. Since more than half of South Carvolth'sstudents are enrolled in Surrey schools, the District is not even saving that 1%.
The administration cited declining enrollment, and prior to the review South Carvolth actually had 3 more students enrolled for September than were graduating and moving on to High School. Under-utilization was also mentioned, but the school that was closed had 77% utilization where other schools in the district are currently around 60% and are projected to have even more empty desks in the future.
The District's policy states they can review any school when there is room in the surrounding schools for the students that would be displaced. Any other considerations are secondary, although there are eight clear points listed. Only one of those 8 is measurable. Any change in the process that would make it clearer to all parties involved what the benefits and drawbacks of closing a school will be an improvement.
I do hope any future process also includes some sort of requirement to adhere to the process itself, however. The current process states that alternatives to closure must be presented, and in the case of the South Carvolth review the total number of alternatives presented was zero. None. The fact that the vote actually took place when the districts own guidelines were not being followed should concern all of us,not just those directly affected.
Peter Adamovich
South Langley....
Letter To The Editor - April 29, 2006 - From Peter Adamovich - South Carvolth Kids going to Surrey School
Editor,
As quoted in the Langley Times of April 28, School Trustee Sonya Paterson characterizes the decision by many parents to enroll their children in a small rural school as a threat. It wasn't a threat, and choosing a school that suits our ideals isn't really "jumping ship" as she believes. The parents and students of South Carvolth told the trustees and administration what we value. The board voted 5 to 2 in favour of not providing that sort of service to our community. The trustees were informed of that intention prior to voting, and they essentially voted those students (and the provincial funding that goes with them) out of the district.
In my case, another issue is distance: Halls Prairie Elementary in Surrey is actually the closest school to my home after South Carvolth closes. While not everyone in a rural community can hope that their children can walk to school, my daughters could have. That option is no longer available, but if I have to choose between sending them down the street or 6 km away, I'll choose down the street even if there happens to be a school district border between here and there. I'm free to send my childrento a school (or district) that I believe shares the values I do.
There doesn't happen to be an appropriate private school in the area, otherwise I may have considered that an option. Would that constitute "jumping ship" as well? The district administration and the trustees seem to think that's a good option for the families that will be moving into the Highpoint development, and not having those potential students in the district didn't seem to be a good enough reason for the board to keep South Carvolth open. That includes Trustee Patterson who voted to close the school.
The school district has decided it does not want to be in the business of running a small school. The parents of the children that enrolled at Halls Prairie have made it clear that is the kind of school they want. While Trustee Patterson may think the parents and students have abandoned the school district, it is a two way street, isn't it?
Peter Adamovich
South Langley....
Friday, April 28, 2006
Mexico Decriminalizes Pot, Cocaine - Yup You Heard Right!
Softwood Lumber Agreement Unraveling Already - Impinges On Canadian Sovereignty
Sweden's Muslims Demand Separate Laws For Muslims!
Ken Dryden & Gerard Kennedy Makes It Ten Little Indians
Thursday, April 27, 2006
Do We Really Still Have A Valid NAFTA Agreement Anymore?
says the CBC headline. But read the fine print. 'Certain Canadian export restrictions will kick in. Producers would have to pay an export tax of five per cent if there's a small drop in price. If it's a larger drop, they would have to pay as much as 15 per cent. Exporters who don't want to pay the tax will have to limit their volume of exports.' Finally we only get $4 of the $5 billion the U.S. collected in duty back!
OK, so how is this free trade? Are we missing something or did Canadians essentially lose on this dispute agreement and did the U.S. actually win despite all the rulings that said we were in the right on this dispute? I thought NAFTA was supposed to be an agreement to end these types of darn ad-hoc sidebar agreements and countervailing duties! Nothing substantially has changed. What good is NAFTA to Canada any more if its not worth the paper its written on?
Canoe reports that the opposition parties quickly attacked the deal. NDP Leader Jack Layton called it a "sellout," and Liberal Leader Bill Graham sarcastically said it was "a great day - for the American industry." Not a real resounding endorsement from our own B.C. Forests Minister Rich Coleman who said a deal this complex is full of tradeoffs. "You have enthusiasm in some sectors, you have ambivalence in others and you've got some people who are just sort of heaving a sigh of relief and saying we've finally got this done and now we can work within a deal for stability," he said.
Why are we all celebrating, especially our Harper Conservative Government, if this is no longer free trade as per the North American Free Trade Agreement Mulroney's Conservatives signed? The bigger question is what more did PM Harper negotiate away that has not yet been revealed? Is our energy next? What about our water?....
B.C. Government Introduces Legislation to Limit School Class Sizes
3 Way Liberal Leadership Race
Voters Like Idea of a Liberal-NDP Merger
Bob Rae, a former NDP premier of Ontario, advocates uniting "progressive'' voters while Michael Ignatieff, a rookie Toronto MP and acclaimed scholar, is urging the party to plant its flag firmly on the centre-left of the political spectrum. Both are very good friends and both are declared candidates seeking the Liberal Party leadership.
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
Letter to the Editor - April 26,2006 - From Tom Ouellette - Honour Our Troops - Red Fridays
Red Fridays
RED FRIDAYS ----- Very soon, you will see a great many people wearing Red every Friday. The reason? Canadians who support our troops used to be called the "silent majority". We are no longer silent, and are voicing our love for God, country and home in record breaking numbers.
We are not organized, boisterous or over-bearing. We get no liberal media coverage on TV, to reflect our message or our opinions.
Many Canadians, like you, me and all our friends, simply want to recognize that the vast majority of Canadians supporting our troops. Our idea of showing solidarity and support for our troops with dignity and respect starts this Friday -and continues each and every Friday until the troops all come home, sending a deafening message that every red-blooded Canadian who supports our men and women afar will wear
something red.
By word of mouth, press, TV -- let's make Canada on every Friday a sea of red much like a homecoming football game in the bleachers. If every one of us who loves this country will share this with acquaintances,co-workers, friends, and family. It will not be long before Canada is covered in RED and it will let our troops know the once "silent" majority is on their side more than ever, certainly more than the media
lets on.
The first thing a soldier says when asked "What can we do to make things better for you?" is...We need your support and your prayers. Let's get the word out and lead with class and dignity, by example; and wear some thing red every Friday.
IF YOU AGREE -- THEN SEND THIS ON.
Tom Ouellette
c.c. Aldergrove Star, Langley Times, Langley Advance
Tom Ouellette ran unsuccessfully against the incumbent in the past November 2005 Langley Township Municipal election. While not successful, his showing was impressively close to the incumbent.....
Total Taxes For Average Canadian Family Increased 1,600 % Since 1961!
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
"Happy Fun Kid's Club" - by Rick Mercer
Monday, April 24, 2006
Are The Harper Conservatives Essentially Censoring Our War Dead Images? Why?
Bloggers Are The New Sherpas
Then There Were Eight - Bob Rae & Carolyn Bennett In Liberal Race
Four More Coming Home As Threat Getting Worse
Sunday, April 23, 2006
Then There Were 6 – Scott Brison Is In
Saturday, April 22, 2006
Tories Will No Longer Lower Our Flags For Canadian War Dead In Afghanistan
Canadian Afghan War Dead Tally - In Honour & In Grief
To view details on Canadian Soldiers killed in the Afghan war to date link to either CBC or iCasualities.org. Below is partial list started from LFP before it started to get too large.
- Capt. Nichola Kathleen Sarah Goddard was the first ever female Canadian Soldier killed in combat. See LFP posting. Captain Goddard was a 26-year-old CFB Shilo-based soldier and was killed during a firefight with Taliban insurgents May 17, 2006.
- Four soldiers were killed today April 22,2006 in what could be the worst one-day combat loss for the Canadian army since the Korean War.
- Pte. Robert Costall, age 22 died and three other canadians were wounded during a firefight with Taliban insurgents north of Kandahar early Wednesday morning March 29, 2006.
- A soldier was killed and another later died from his injuries after their armoured vehicle ran off a road in the Kandahar area on March 2, 2006. Six others were injured.
- A Canadian diplomat was killed and three Canadian soldiers were wounded in a suicide bombing near Kandahar on Jan. 15, 2006.
- One soldier lost his life and four were injured when the armoured vehicle they were travelling in rolled over on Nov. 24, 2005, near Kandahar.
- One soldier died in a suicide bombing on Jan. 27 2004 while on patrol near Kabul. Three others were wounded.
- Two soldiers were killed and three were wounded in a roadside bombing southwest of Kabul on Oct. 2, 2003.
- Four soldiers were killed and eight were wounded in a friendly-fire incident near Kandahar on April 18, 2002. A U.S. F-16 fighter jet mistakenly bombed the Canadians, who were on an training exercise.
Then There Were Five - Liberal Leadership Race
Thursday, April 20, 2006
Muriel's Thoughts - April 20, 2006
Despite the protests of many citizens from the Township, Langley Township Council recently approved the Parklane development on the former Interfor lands. While attending thepublic meeting last week, I listened to a number of Fort Langley citizens who spoke passionately about their concerns regarding increased traffic, illegal suites, visual disturbances for current property owners and the noise from frequent train traffic. While I agree that all of these are major concerns, I am surprised that very little attention has been paid to the very real threat of flooding in the area. I am wondering how many others question the wisdom of placing hundreds of new homes on a recognized floodplain?
While on Council, I referenced all of my decisions regarding the appropriateness of development on management guidelines based on the “WestwaterResearch Centre” report prepared for the Township. Reference to that comprehensive report indicates that the lowlands around Fort Langley have floodplain status and that construction should be avoided due to potential flooding problems.
The view concurs with the findings of The Fraser Basin Council which has published information regarding the risks associated with development in the floodplain of the Lower Fraser River. They point out that while there have been no catastrophic flood events on the Fraser River since 1948 that the risk of “the Big One” remains. Their report refers to a one-in-three chance that a Fraser River flood of record will re-occur within the next 50 years and that given the “significant development” in recent years within the Lower Fraser floodplain that a flood of this magnitude could be catastrophic.
They advise that the most effective method to reduce this risk is to have local governments take into account flood risks and to regulate development on the floodplain in order to ensure that development occurs on the least hazardous lands to ensure public safety and protection of property(1).
Based on this criteria alone, why did Council support this development? When the inevitable happens, who will be left to pick up the pieces and pay the price? Parklane? The Municipality? The Provincial Government? In a worst case scenario, I believe that we would all be left holding the bag as a result of the failure of our local government to deny development on lands which are not suitable. I believe that we all deserve better.
Sincerely, Muriel Arnason
Muriel Arnason was Langley Township's longest serving Councillor and in December 2005 decided to take a break from Council. She cares very much about the people and now shares her thoughts in LFP regularily.
(1)The Fraser Basin Council
David Emerson Frustrated as a Conservative And More! Minister's Office Denies Remarks
Then There Were Four - Liberal Leadership Race
Wednesday, April 19, 2006
Local News Review Langley Times - 4/19/06
Meanwhile Gas prices are going through the roof with no end in site because George Bush and his Mini Me Harper are sabre rattling about Iran! Which means more out of the way trips to Abbotsford Fraser highway gas alley where we have to line up with the masses to get cheaper GVRD tax free gas. And if you can tell me what the Editor's message is in his editorial today on I think, this topic, you win the Gumby award for dechipering! Does rambling come with boredom or time or both?
Meanwhile obviously the paper had a dearth of good letters to the editor and once again dug up a letter on divinity. Ever notice that they love to publish this pablum with glorious lines like "vastness of space and the nano-universe" ? Also get this wonderfully creative headline added by the I assume the editor on this letter, "Editor: Faith in God can be a wonderful blessing or a curse". Very pertinent to Langley ain't it? When can we expect equal opportunity divinity letters for other religions? Not bad though, consider sometimes fully one quarter to one third are divinely inspired letters!
A really great letter says it all though that the abundance of jobs out there are probably low paying minumum wage and part time jobs!
Proof that times are tough for people are that hard working crooks now climb telephone poles to cut high tension telephone cables for their copper resale value! Maybe this experience now better qualifies them as telephone repairmen!....
Tuesday, April 18, 2006
Local News Review Langley Advance - 4/18/06
Councillor Richter in a news story by Matthew Claxton suggests that the entire Translink parking tax should be cut and that "It's about time people got upset about this,". Where is our silent mayor on this item? He occupies one of the 12 seats on Translink and is a decision maker!
I don't know about you but something is desperately wrong when municipalities start relocating/diverting our rivers, creeks & brooks. Why not just divert them all into our culverts or better still into one straight river in Langley!?
Duh, Township folks' "satisfaction with Township services has slipped" according to a Township commissioned survey. Yet Councillor Bob Long in the column responding to the survey says "The results gave him confidence council is generally headed in the right direction with the current budget..". Wonder what Bob had in his coffee when he said that? Lets see 5-5-5 % municipal tax hikes in the next 3 years. So if satisfaction slips even more in the next survey does that mean Council is heading in an even more right direction then Bob? Like I said ..Duh.
Meanwhile South Carvolth Kids are on the move with many going to go to a Surrey school. Sad.
By the way kudos to the Langley Advance on listing all their archive issues for viewing on their web page and our favorite article of all for 2005.. Nov 18th! Ah yes.. the questionable advisory committee! ....
Saturday, April 15, 2006
BC 211 Telephone Service Coming Soon
Friday, April 14, 2006
New Harper Tories - Get In Line Or Get Fired
Thursday, April 13, 2006
Another Point Of View On Afghanistan War
Do You Really Want To Keep Eating Hamburger?
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
Vecchiato's Voice - April 12, 2006 - DUMP THAT DIRT HERE, SIR!
The engineer in change is Phil LeMay (604-533-6146), who was helpful in giving information. I informed him that the lake portion of the pit was year round and was home to fish and amphibians. Great blue herons can be seen feeding on the creatures who manage to find the water instead of ending up in a dry-up zone. Although heron habitat is not protected, their nests are protected throughout the year by the Provincial Wildlife Act. Because of the fish and amphibians, DFO should be contacted if any changes are made to this portion of the site.
From my understanding, Firehall Number 5 backs onto this parcel, and having dump trucks pass on a constant basis would pose concern to those whose job is to save lives. Having seen the massive increase in truck traffic, I can understand the concern.
Mr. LeMay and I did discuss residential concerns that have arisen due to fill being dumped on properties. Numerous stories have crept up recently, with township giving approval to filling properties, which then puts neighbors at a lower grade. He expressed his opinion that it’s their property and they should do what they want. I didn’t feel it was appropriate for a civil servant to voice such a strong opinion on property rights, when I have heard horror stories from all quadrants of Langley Township. If Engineering is approving grade changes that affect neighboring properties, they should rethink their approval process.
Any suggestions or comments on the issue are welcome.
Cathleen Vecchiato has been an outspoken environmentalist for the past 5-1/2 years. She is a very well recognized champion of the environment and a community activist in Langley as well as in other adjoining communities. Cathleen formed and leads the Langley Conservation Network. Editor-LFP....
BC Legislative Police Raid - Where Are The Media Questions?
"Live the adventure in Afghanistan" - Join Tim Hortons Kandahar
Now Only 3 Running To Replace Paul Martin
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
Harper Models Press Conference After Bush
Rabble Rousers Rrr Rocking
U.S. Army Officer's Top 10 Reasons For Canada To Stay In Afghanistan
10. Oil to Benefit Canada ( The US too?).
9. Poppy (heroin) Industry back in Afghanistan ( Eliminated under the Taliban!).
8. Prevent human-rights abuses (Hey, I can buy this one).
7. Protect fledgling Democracy in Afghanistan (Hope it holds).
6. Canada's chance of success better in Afghanistan (Than what?)!
5. Support NATO's(USA) self defense clause treaty obligation (legal contract!).
4. "A secure Afghanistan means a secure Central Asia" (yeah right!)!
3. Prove to the US we can & will, "it's good to accentuate the positive" (suck up)!
2. Prove to the world we are not a "soft, outmoded 'peacekeeping' force" (suck up more).
And the # 1 reason for Canada to stay in Afghanistan is;
1. "Better to halt bacterial growth in the petri dish now rather than letting it grow and one day infect our shores." (fade out to a star spangled banner...).
I don't know about you, but U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel Stephen J. Mariano has provided me all the reasons to formulate my opinions on Canada staying in Afghanistan. How about you? I'm so glad he's here in Canada helping educate our students!....
Monday, April 10, 2006
Vecchiato's Voice - April 10, 2006 - HIGH POINT OR LOW POINT?
Consultants from Aplin Martin, the consulting firm said that the sewer was inevitable, whether high point is constructed or not. The tie-in with High Point is that the developer must pay for sewer down 200th, and will be reimbursed over 20 years as businesses and home hook up to the sewer. There was a feeling that if staying on septic allows the neighborhood to stay the same, and then septic it is. The pro-sewer people—usually who have bought property on speculation or people whose septic fields are nearing their end—did not appear to be in attendance.
The development itself extends from Zero Avenue to Eighth Avenue and from 196th Street along Surrey’s border to approximately 205th. The lots are large and surrounded by trails for equestrian use. The plans looked like an ideal community, or at least for those who can afford million dollar homes. Personally, the development isn’t one that will allow total clearing as we’ve seen in Willoughby. Sidewalks are not part of the development plan, and with Brookswood’s excellent drainage, re-infiltration is planned for any storm water run-off. Please remember that one of the worst offenders to streams is storm-water sewers that spew road pollutant water into salmon-bearing streams.
A little brake dust on your salmon tonight, sir?
Comment sheets were available for attendees, as were individual petitions for voters to halt the project. These must be signed and hand delivered (no faxes) to township hall by April 20, 2006. They can be obtained through the township. I am not thorough enough to know if the form can be downloaded from the internet if you are adamant about the development not going through.
Several astute followers of local politics were available, and the main argument against the development was that the Planning directive, written in 1995 by our former planner and current mayor, recommends development in one area at a time. This is far more financially prudent than allowing road construction, sewer and water lines, police stations, street lights, and the rest of the servicing that comes in a development package in more than one place. servicing is expensive, and the DCC's from High Point are in place to cover the sewer...for now.
My own personal concern is that $20 million is a lot for a developer to shell out for sewer, so it will encourage hook up along 200th and throughout Brookswood and Fernridge sooner than most residents would like it. I would like a guarantee that any new development is far different than what we are seeing in Willoughby and throughout Surrey.
Cathleen Vecchiato has been an outspoken environmentalist for the past 5-1/2 years. She is a very well recognized champion of the environment and a community activist in Langley as well as in other adjoining communities. Cathleen formed and leads the Langley Conservation Network. Editor-LFP....
Troops To Stay in Afghanistan For Years: Harper
—What is Canada's role?
—How long will it take?
—How is victory to be defined?
The NDP also criticized the fact that the mission is supposed to be operating under a NATO command, not under the umbrella of the United States.
Top Canadian General Hillier Wants More Muslims in Our Military
Sunday, April 09, 2006
'When we kill enough(Canadians) ... they will quit' Says Afghanistan Taliban
CP further reports that a poll survey by Decima Research found 45 per cent of Canadian respondents considered the deployment a good idea while 46 per cent viewed it as a bad idea. It is also quoted as saying 25 per cent of respondents said the troops should stay as long as it takes to complete the mission. Another 10 per cent said they should stay another year or two, while 15 per cent were willing to see them stay up to five years.
Friday, April 07, 2006
BC Lib Govt To Blame For Child Protection Mess
Its Official, Ignatieff & Dion Vie To Succeed Paul Martin
The Toronto Star reports that both the 58 year old Rookie Liberal MP Michael Ignatieff and former federal environment minister Stephane Dion will face off against each other to succeed Paul Martin as the elected new leader of the federal Liberal party. They join 63 year old Liberal MP John Godfrey , Martha Hall Findlay and Gerard Kennedy, Ontario's popular education minister for a total to date of 5 who officially have hit the floor running for the federal Liberals to be elected as their new leader in early December in the Montreal convention. More candidates are rumoured to join. Belinda Stronach announced yesterday she would not vie for the job this time around.....
First sponsorship Sentence Handed Down - 18 Months In Jail
Montreal advertising executive Paul Coffin will serve 18 months in jail unless he appeals, as reported by CTV. His initial sentence was for only two years of conditional community service but the Crown appealed saying it was not harsh enough. The Crown succeeded today in making him the "poster boy" example for receiving $1.6 million from the sponsorship program while doing next-to-nothing in return. Coffin pleaded guilty to 15 counts of fraud.
"Preston-for-Premier" Gains Steam
Pierre Trudeau’s Son, Justin Leads Liberal Renewal Task Force
Wednesday, April 05, 2006
Richter Report - April 5, 2006 - Warawa Promises "Complete Response"
From: Mark Warawa, M.P.
Date: Friday, March 31, 2006 9:32 PM
To: 'Kim Richter'
Subject: RE: Canadian Military Advertising in Washington DC
Dear Ms. Richter,
Thank you for your e-mail, outlining your concerns about the possible direction the federal government may take Canadian Forces.
To answer your concerns comprehensively requires a look at our national policy on foreign affairs and national defence. I will write back soon with a more complete response that I trust will reassure you of the Conservative government’s motives regarding Canada’s military.
Sincerely,
Mark Warawa
Member of Parliament, Langley
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Kim Richter [mailto:kimrichter@canada.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 2:09 PM
To: markwarawa@shaw.ca
Subject: Canadian Military Advertising in Washington DC
Dear MP Warawa:
I am writing to you as a concerned resident of the federal riding you represent. I recently discovered that the federal government is advertising its military presence in the US. Please follow the attached link http://www.dcist.com/archives/2006/03/23/canada_not_just.php
I am very uncomfortable with the military direction that Canada now seems to be taking. This advertisement is adding to my concerns.
Why are we spending money on this? Do you support the change of Canada's peace-keeping role to what now seems to be an increasingly aggressive military stance? Were you aware of the spending taking place on this ad and related website: http://www.canadianally.com/ . What is the "endpoint" or positioning of our military that this government has in mind?
We used to be respected internationally as peace-keepers. Is this role changing?
I would appreciate a response from you at your earliest convenience. Thank you for your time.
Yours very truly,
Kim Richter.
Kim Richter is in her 3rd term as Langley Township Councillor and also is a Professor of Business at Kwantlen University College. She holds a masters degree in health administration and was a health care management consultant. ....
Legislative Raid Charges Expand To Alleged Influence Peddling By Previous Provincial Liberal Ministerial Aides
Restructuring, Rightsizing & Changes At Radio CKNW 980
Tuesday, April 04, 2006
Throne Speech Outlines Harper's 5 Points +
Klein Calls It Quit By Year End
Live Streaming Video & Audio Of Island Nesting Eagles!
Should Richmond School District Help Hand Out Bibles To Students?
Langley RCMP Officer Resigns Over Child Porn
CHANTAL HÉBERT Nine Mp's To Watch
Provincial Lib's Basi, Virk Warrant Information Released
Liberals Don't Need A new Leader To Fight Another Election
Ralph Klein's Wife Warns Palace Revolt May Backfire!
Did Friendly Fire Cause Deaths in Kandahar?
Saturday, April 01, 2006
Vecchiato's Voice - April 1, 2006 - Personal Property Rights? Township’s Doublespeak
I had seen a lot of promise in some candidates, who professed environmentalism, who professed environmental integrity with a religious slant, and who distributed campaign fliers with the candidate cuddling infant wildlife. Yet all the rhetoric suffers a painful death the moment the ballots are counted.
I would name names, but you may be able to guess.
I heard the typical line about supporting personal property rights the same week I received a call from a distraught resident, actually a neighbour, whose own property and that of four others are in peril because one person exercised his personal property rights and cleared every tree from a forested 1/3 acre lot. With the threat of stump removal, the root system would cause neighboring trees to fail; it would collapse septic fields, around which lines the roots had become a part; even foundations are threatened.
What I read is that placating one man’s personal property rights puts neighboring properties in total jeopardy.
My next call was from a long time Willoughby resident, who sold his land under duress to the township. Should he had chosen not to sell, township would have expropriated the land. Any court date had the potential for a judge deciding the case, where the scales of justice could allow township to only pay assessment value for the property. As you stand on his family’s heritage site, you look down the hill at a sea of new rooftops with the only green being an adjacent stream that is planned for possible rerouting. The rooftops themselves are contentious at best. They replace a 216 tree forested parcel that was cleared without a single wildlife survey. The clearing, tragically, took place in the midst of breeding season—it was July 2004.
I had corresponded with the CEO of the development company earlier that year, and received a letter from him, stating that his company did, indeed, provide habitat. Habitat for mammals—the two-legged kind. The sarcasm dripped from the page without a single regret for the type of development he was condoning, money that would alter the face of our town while he could attend gala functions in the city and donate money to the arts and get a philanthropic reputation and a snapshot in the paper.
The majority of the previous council that continue to dominate the decision making process voted in favour of this development. None had ever taken the time to read the tree protection policy, which requested nesting bird surveys when clearing occurred during the March-August window. By the way, the new draft tree by-law, a part of the subdivision by-law, has since deleted any reference to surveys.
But back to personal property rights. I am wondering how an elected official can espouse private property rights, and then expropriate private property, to be used for a four-lane road with the remainder sold by township to developers. How can he be part of the forthcoming rezoning of Brookswood, where many of us don’t want to be rezoned? How can any of them sanction clear cutting on property that is being purchased by an absentee landlord and will be held on speculation until the zoning comes it? If you are selling in Brookswood, watch who you are selling to. What was once your beautiful home will look like the new Willoughby.
So please don’t give me the rhetoric about personal property rights when you represent an administration hell-bent on rezoning and using eminent domain to obtain your property. Don’t tell me about personal property rights when you refuse to enact legislation to protect neighboring properties. Volumes of fill can be placed on a parcel, leaving yours at a lower grade level and doomed to flooding. All the trees can be removed, leaving yours at risk for wind throw and root extraction that will topple landscape and infrastructure of your own private property. Don’t show me pictures of a cute mammal that you cradle in your arms and then vote for every new development proposal, where the same small mammals are crushed under bulldozers.
May citizens realize their taxes on going up annually to subsidize poor development practices, archaic storm water management systems that are financially alleviated by the ever-increasing storm water tax.
And don’t bitch about what seems to be negative complaints by people like me. Would you prefer a “living sort of oblivion," commonly known as apathy?
Cathleen Vecchiato has been an outspoken environmentalist for the past 5-1/2 years. She is a very well recognized champion of the environment and a community activist in Langley as well as in other adjoining communities. Cathleen formed and leads the Langley Conservation Network. Editor-LFP....
Letter To The Editor - April 1, 2006 - From Peter Adamovich - Re: South Carvolth Environmental School Closure Decision
I thought I was done when the board voted. I suppose I'm not through yet. I wrote this to the Times and the Advance, but when I looked and saw that it was almost 1000 words, I realized they'd never print it. I'll send it to the Free Press as it stands, and send a shorter version to the Times and the Advance. The focus may be slightly different when it's shorter...
Editors,
I've written to your papers throughout the closure review, so you may know what side I'm on already. As a parent, I'm dissapointed with the result, but we each seem to have our opinions on that. As a taxpayer, I'm disappointed in the process, and that should concern all of us.
Part of the district's review policy states that alternatives to closing a school must be presented. None were. Why wasn't this questioned? The criteria for selecting a school for possible closure (a candidate school to be reviewed) aren't objective or measurable, with one exception: 200 or fewer F.T.E. 4 schools in Langley have less than 200 students, so why was South Carvolth the only one to be reviewed? If the board had been presented with more than a single yes or no option by the administration, it would be more likely that the board could have made a decision
that made a difference to the district as a whole.
Trustees, senior staff, and even editorial staff at the Times have said that this difficult decision is in the interests of all the students in the district. Only barely: South Carvolth had 27 empty desks, a little more than one maximum capacity elementary classroom. Closing this school does less to reduce excess capacity in the district than keeping it open, since new registrations for September were already more than the number of students graduating from Grade 7. Supposing for a moment that all the students are going to stay in the district (and they're not), the excess capacity in the district overall goes down by 0.7 percent.
If the district's aim is to reduce the excess capacity overall, they should have considered closing Bradshaw elementary, currently running at 52% capacity with only 166 students and a capacity of 317. Bradshaw students likely could still walk to Belmont, Alice Brown or Noel Booth, and while I recognize that means closing a school for almost twice the number of students, I think the possibility should have at least been considered. Closing South Carvolth would essentially mean that if students stay in the district, they would likely all have to be bussed to school, and even then the other schools would still not be at or near capacity.
What about the resources that go into "keeping an expensive school open for a small number of students". It has been stated that South Carvolth is a small school, and therefore very expensive on a per-student basis. While it's not the most expensive in the district, it is among the top five. But step back a moment, South Carvolth is a small school. So even if the cost per student is high, the total cost is not as much as any other school in the district. Again, closing South Carvolth has a very small effect on the district as a whole. And as I mentioned above, many students will not be attending Langley School District public schools following the closure, so the cost savings will not be fully realized by the other students in the district.
However, as the trustees have heard and many parents, students, and teachers have stated, South Carvolth is a successful learning environment. How much is a good education worth? Businesses talk about return on investment. Surely learning ought to be the measure, more importantly than the price per student. And these are our children we're talking about. Economies of scale should not be more important to us than the quality of the result.
What about the subject of declining enrollment? The district as a whole does have a serious problem on it's hands. However, the district's own figures show that South Carvolth's enrolment has gone up and down in the last 10 years, not steadily declined as claimed in the review report. The school was poised to have more students in 2006/07 than this year. This is without any increase from the High Point development, or the potential increase from sewer and water along 200th street.
All of these points were raised to the trustees, mostly through the Site Committee. The answers to the Site Committee's questions were difficult to obtain, and in many cases the information provided by district administration were non-answers or merely quotes from district policy. My last letter was printed in both the Times and the Advance, and was sent to all the trustees, urging them to be sure to review Glenn Miller's submission which did more to address all the points that should have been part of the review than anything the administration put together. Alison McVeigh responded to my email ensuring me that she had reviewed the information. It did not matter to her that more information was presented from concerned parents than the
district's own staff. It didn't matter to the 5 trustees who voted to close the school that the criteria for review are not measurable. It didn't matter to the administration that their figures on enrollment projections were changed between the original recommendation and the final review report, at least not enough for them to present some justification for the differences. In the final analysis, the district doesn't care enough to put any effort into a "difficult decision."
And how much did this review cost the district, and ultimately the residents and students of Langley? Every dollar spent on this review is a dollar not spent on education. I don't know the answer to that, but whatever the cost in time and research, it's not likely to be of benefit to all students in Langley School District #35.
Peter Adamovich
Langley....