I sent the following letter to all of the local media. As yet it has not appeared in print.
" You all know me and I know you. In fact Sam and I have supported you all, in particular you Councillor Ferguson. Steve we were on your Campaign Team when you ran for Mayor so I am more than just a passing acquaintance and Councillor Ward, Sam and I have known and respected you for years.
You all know we were members of Rick Green's Campaign Team but I am not flag-waving for Mayor Green I am saying that I, together with hundreds of Langley Township residents are bitterly disappointed in the way you have been conducting yourselves and representing, we, the Langley Township electorate.
The idea of an in-your-face confrontation with an elected official with the Press primed at your side and armed with a tape recorder is abhorrent. If you try to tape a phone conversation to be used later it is not legal to do so unless you have informed the speaker of your intent and received permission to do so.
Did you tape conversations when you were planning to spend millions of our tax dollars behind closed doors. I think not.
You cannot change the November election result. In fact you are insulting everyone who voted for change in Langley by acting like we don't count. If it is your intention to carry on political sniping and causing a furor at every opportunity to score personal brownie points, I suggest you think again.
Langley needs strong united leadership with constructive criticism not a pack mentality of hyenas. How can we believe in your good judgment on issues like the one you are making on the Mufford overpass?
I urge you to have a good look at your behaviors. You may not like what you see because we the Electorate sure don't. I thought we were all pretty good judges of character but you have really let Langley taxpayers down."
Pam Omelaniec
Edited By LFP EDITOR...
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Langley Free Press Editorial Rebuttal To Langley Advance Editor's Unbalanced View.
Bob Groeneveld: I, the LFP Editor, disagree completely with your editorial in today's Langley Advance.
My rebuttal to your editorial consists of 5 points. I hope you will give them some consideration. They are as follows:
Are you paying attention, Editor Groeneveld?...
My rebuttal to your editorial consists of 5 points. I hope you will give them some consideration. They are as follows:
- The people elected Mayor Green for his message of financial responsibility and change, yet you seem to want him to just become a simple traffic cop of the council meetings. Why? If the Mayor is not permitted to drive the agenda against an obviously hostile group on council, how can this community ever hope to move forward in the next 3 years?
- Why did you rub the former Mayor's central campaign slogan: "...through cooperation and working together" in Mayor Green's face? Rick Green was elected. Kurt Alberts wasn't. Questionable ethics here? Or did you miss the message?
- Why aren't your editorials EVER equally chastising of what the "gang of four" is doing? Can you not see it? Aren't their sabotaging efforts worthy of an editorial? Or is your view clouded because of affiliations?
- Some are quick to say that the political and municipal advertising has nothing to do with the editorial comment. Should we believe this?
- Are you doing this simply to "sell" more controversy/papers? Shame on you if you are because all you are really doing is feeding the dysfunctionality. But then again you have had 9 years of pablum fed to you so maybe you are just doing this to shake things up a bit. Too bad the new Mayor is your scape goat. I could have easily thought of others on council.
Are you paying attention, Editor Groeneveld?...
Langley Advance Editor Slaps Mayor Rick Green's Knuckles!
Langley Advance Editor Slaps Mayor Rick Green's knuckles! As well as the two councillors, Grant Ward and Steve Ferguson, all for squabbling in public. Advance Editor Bob Groeneveld is quoted in the Langley Advance saying:
"Now we've got a mayor and a couple of councillors playing Petulant Patty over the public purse. While the two councillors involved in this latest bout of bickering need to stand in the corner and think about how they might have handled the situation differently, the chief responsibility for this one falls squarely on the shoulders of Mayor Rick Green."
View the full Editorial titled "Quit Squabbling" by Langley Advance Editor Bob Groeneveld. He further essentially admonishes them for squabbling when fiscal concerns world wide and in Langley certainly call for better behavior and focus on the taxpayers business.
Meanwhile former school trustee and Township Councilor candidate Sonia Paterson, in the same Advance newspaper essentially encourages Councillor Ward & Ferguson to get counseling on how to conduct themselves in public meetings!
Funny I don't remember the previous Mayor having such a short honeymoon. A sign perhaps of things to come?
The Mayor & two Councillors won't be very happy with this Advance editorial!!!!!
I guess the media bloom for Mayor Green is now really over. Gee, its not even been the end of the first 100 days in office yet for the new Mayor!...
"Now we've got a mayor and a couple of councillors playing Petulant Patty over the public purse. While the two councillors involved in this latest bout of bickering need to stand in the corner and think about how they might have handled the situation differently, the chief responsibility for this one falls squarely on the shoulders of Mayor Rick Green."
View the full Editorial titled "Quit Squabbling" by Langley Advance Editor Bob Groeneveld. He further essentially admonishes them for squabbling when fiscal concerns world wide and in Langley certainly call for better behavior and focus on the taxpayers business.
Meanwhile former school trustee and Township Councilor candidate Sonia Paterson, in the same Advance newspaper essentially encourages Councillor Ward & Ferguson to get counseling on how to conduct themselves in public meetings!
Funny I don't remember the previous Mayor having such a short honeymoon. A sign perhaps of things to come?
The Mayor & two Councillors won't be very happy with this Advance editorial!!!!!
I guess the media bloom for Mayor Green is now really over. Gee, its not even been the end of the first 100 days in office yet for the new Mayor!...
Sunday, February 22, 2009
The "Langley Politics Foursome" (4-Sum) Think They Drove A Hole In One! LOL!
We will henceforth be regularly posting the latest Langley politics game in town. It's the hottest and newest political mind game in Looney Langley and is very loosely based on a political version of golf. The star players of the group we will be highlighting regularly henceforth are the "Langley Politics Foursome" (4-Sum). They are none other than Councillors Grant Ward, Steve Ferguson, Charlie Fox and their political wannabee Foursome's strategic team captain, mentor and scorecard keeper, Councilor Jordan Bateman.
The games duration is a tournament of 36 holes and since November, we are still not yet even on the 4th hole so far a little over 3 months after this term's Tournament began! But that has not stopped the games being played by the "Langley Politics Foursome" (4-Sum) . No Sirree! In fact Clr. Ward was first off the tee essentially throwing the rule book out just days after the game started in November crying foul and jumping up and down on the fairway because he could never fathom how his favorite previous golfing buddy, his former golf slate team captain and the previous 36 hole Tournament Chairman was ever booted from the tournament by the onlooking gallery of voting spectators last November! On November 15th, 2008, all the Langley Township Tournament gallery taxpaying spectators elected their club's newest roster of players including the tournament's new chairman and independent player, Mayor Rick Green.
Clr. Bateman though was not far behind Clr. Ward's Golf Game Chairman rules protest when he boldly called the newest player and Tournament Chair, Mayor Green, for so called illegal public airing of the contract details of their newest ~$50 million sports club building! After Mayor Green corrected and chided him, Bateman promptly made sure to correct that statement by telling everyone he did not say that at all. Rather rookie political sports commentator, Langley Advance reporter Claxton, misunderstood what he had really said. Wow.... glad Bateman cleared that up so that we will always now have to question any other written word by the political Golf game commentator in question. I guess because it was never refuted to the best of my knowledge. But then again Claxton and the Langley Advance never officially renounced their statement either to the best of my knowledge!
Last week while still on the 3rd fairway two more 4-Sum team/slate players revealed themselves when they spent well over an hour going over whether a report from a competing player would be submitted on the 2nd or 3rd of March. Yes folks, Clr. Charlie Fox and Clr. Steve Ferguson (student of Political Golf I guess?) essentially officially added their names on the same 4-Sum scorecard as their teammates, Clrs. Ward and scorecard keeper and team leader, Clr. Bateman! Believe it or not they then argued for over an HOUR about this ONE day's difference in providing a report on the Langley Club's finance's and budget committee . At the same time 4-Sum team member Clr. Ferguson argued with player Green about being left out of supposed private clubhouse get togethers. This of course was argued over by the two players for what again seemed an eternity.
Meanwhile, Clr. Fox at this very same meeting seemed to be angry because of 24 inches of information!??? Many said this was just another challenge to gauge the strength of the golf game's Tournament Chair and his rules, but Fox even insisted on distributing the picture of the 24 inches of documents that hearkened this commentator back to the famous photos that George W. Bush publicly as well pointed to as proof positive by illustrating pictures of Weapons of mass destruction in his ill fated attempt to sell his story with his CIA satellite photos. Good one Charlie I can now absolutely relate to the message you were trying to get across!!!
Suddenly yesterday another fracas over the political golf game rules exploded once again. You guessed it, Clrs. Ferguson & Ward again challenging the tournament chair,Mayor Green, with a tag team approach so aggressive indeed, that many thought that perhaps these two forgot that this was political golf, not political tag team wrestling! Even their scorekeeper made sure to distance himself when his blog sit in said he was far away and essentially not involved in this game diversion! Yeah right! This time they again argued loudly over their attempt to say the rules are not being followed by Tournament Chair and Player Mayor Rick Green. Clr. Ferguson again says he is being left in the dark which makes this writer wonder out loud how long it would take him indeed to find the light switch in any dark room? Heck even Clr. Ward is heard to be so inconsolable that he even insists that Mayor Green not use his first name at all but address him as "Councillor"! Remember he is still probably not at all over the fact that his previous team captain and tournament chair is no longer there! Probably never will be either!
The "Langley Politics Foursome" (4-Sum) are also always accompanied by at latest count 3 caddies who are very reticent to be identified and prefer to avoid the limelight for obvious legal & political reasons. One, a failed wannabee politico is working the Langley Politics Golf Course Fire & Sports lobby control angle, the second is their recorder and documenter, and the third is their technical guru in charge of internet technology and video audio conversions. So successful in fact that he seems to be beaming with pride over his recent technical conversion success vociferously promoting his accomplishments!
The 4-Sum so far have focused their gaming skills against only two other competing players who are, to the 4-Sum's chagrin, constantly at par, often have successful birdies and definitely more than one hole in one in the early part of this game so far. It's only three holes after all into this term's game after all. With 33 holes remaining to be played in this unique Langley Politics game before the viewing gallery public audience votes in and out a new roster of players, we look forward to providing our continuing tournament coverage and will specifically continue highlighting the "Langley Politics Foursome" (4-Sum) because frankly they need the EXPOSURE along with their trusted caddies. It's clear that the hidden and secretive back room caddies combined with their obvious lack of political gaming talent remains their handicap. Stay tuned for the continuing 'as your stomach turns' saga of the infamous "Langley Politics Foursome" (4-Sum)! Only available here on Langley Free Press - your only reliable source of "Langley Politics Foursome" (4-Sum) Gaming Center coverage!...
The games duration is a tournament of 36 holes and since November, we are still not yet even on the 4th hole so far a little over 3 months after this term's Tournament began! But that has not stopped the games being played by the "Langley Politics Foursome" (4-Sum) . No Sirree! In fact Clr. Ward was first off the tee essentially throwing the rule book out just days after the game started in November crying foul and jumping up and down on the fairway because he could never fathom how his favorite previous golfing buddy, his former golf slate team captain and the previous 36 hole Tournament Chairman was ever booted from the tournament by the onlooking gallery of voting spectators last November! On November 15th, 2008, all the Langley Township Tournament gallery taxpaying spectators elected their club's newest roster of players including the tournament's new chairman and independent player, Mayor Rick Green.
Clr. Bateman though was not far behind Clr. Ward's Golf Game Chairman rules protest when he boldly called the newest player and Tournament Chair, Mayor Green, for so called illegal public airing of the contract details of their newest ~$50 million sports club building! After Mayor Green corrected and chided him, Bateman promptly made sure to correct that statement by telling everyone he did not say that at all. Rather rookie political sports commentator, Langley Advance reporter Claxton, misunderstood what he had really said. Wow.... glad Bateman cleared that up so that we will always now have to question any other written word by the political Golf game commentator in question. I guess because it was never refuted to the best of my knowledge. But then again Claxton and the Langley Advance never officially renounced their statement either to the best of my knowledge!
Last week while still on the 3rd fairway two more 4-Sum team/slate players revealed themselves when they spent well over an hour going over whether a report from a competing player would be submitted on the 2nd or 3rd of March. Yes folks, Clr. Charlie Fox and Clr. Steve Ferguson (student of Political Golf I guess?) essentially officially added their names on the same 4-Sum scorecard as their teammates, Clrs. Ward and scorecard keeper and team leader, Clr. Bateman! Believe it or not they then argued for over an HOUR about this ONE day's difference in providing a report on the Langley Club's finance's and budget committee . At the same time 4-Sum team member Clr. Ferguson argued with player Green about being left out of supposed private clubhouse get togethers. This of course was argued over by the two players for what again seemed an eternity.
Meanwhile, Clr. Fox at this very same meeting seemed to be angry because of 24 inches of information!??? Many said this was just another challenge to gauge the strength of the golf game's Tournament Chair and his rules, but Fox even insisted on distributing the picture of the 24 inches of documents that hearkened this commentator back to the famous photos that George W. Bush publicly as well pointed to as proof positive by illustrating pictures of Weapons of mass destruction in his ill fated attempt to sell his story with his CIA satellite photos. Good one Charlie I can now absolutely relate to the message you were trying to get across!!!
Suddenly yesterday another fracas over the political golf game rules exploded once again. You guessed it, Clrs. Ferguson & Ward again challenging the tournament chair,Mayor Green, with a tag team approach so aggressive indeed, that many thought that perhaps these two forgot that this was political golf, not political tag team wrestling! Even their scorekeeper made sure to distance himself when his blog sit in said he was far away and essentially not involved in this game diversion! Yeah right! This time they again argued loudly over their attempt to say the rules are not being followed by Tournament Chair and Player Mayor Rick Green. Clr. Ferguson again says he is being left in the dark which makes this writer wonder out loud how long it would take him indeed to find the light switch in any dark room? Heck even Clr. Ward is heard to be so inconsolable that he even insists that Mayor Green not use his first name at all but address him as "Councillor"! Remember he is still probably not at all over the fact that his previous team captain and tournament chair is no longer there! Probably never will be either!
The "Langley Politics Foursome" (4-Sum) are also always accompanied by at latest count 3 caddies who are very reticent to be identified and prefer to avoid the limelight for obvious legal & political reasons. One, a failed wannabee politico is working the Langley Politics Golf Course Fire & Sports lobby control angle, the second is their recorder and documenter, and the third is their technical guru in charge of internet technology and video audio conversions. So successful in fact that he seems to be beaming with pride over his recent technical conversion success vociferously promoting his accomplishments!
The 4-Sum so far have focused their gaming skills against only two other competing players who are, to the 4-Sum's chagrin, constantly at par, often have successful birdies and definitely more than one hole in one in the early part of this game so far. It's only three holes after all into this term's game after all. With 33 holes remaining to be played in this unique Langley Politics game before the viewing gallery public audience votes in and out a new roster of players, we look forward to providing our continuing tournament coverage and will specifically continue highlighting the "Langley Politics Foursome" (4-Sum) because frankly they need the EXPOSURE along with their trusted caddies. It's clear that the hidden and secretive back room caddies combined with their obvious lack of political gaming talent remains their handicap. Stay tuned for the continuing 'as your stomach turns' saga of the infamous "Langley Politics Foursome" (4-Sum)! Only available here on Langley Free Press - your only reliable source of "Langley Politics Foursome" (4-Sum) Gaming Center coverage!...
Monday, February 16, 2009
Susan Semonick On Schools - Langley Middle Schools - Let's Get It Right For The Kids' Sake!
Having heard and read as much as I can about the current issue in this district, there are several questions that come to mind that I think need answers.
1. Regarding the school timetable, which would sync with the high school, the blocks are roughly 77 to 80 minutes long. This is a long block even for high school students. Will these blocks be broken up into two sessions, or other shorter time frames when teaching?
2. How will the grade 8s (in the 2009-2010 school year) receive the additional 23 minutes of instruction per day?
3. Do parents understand that for the 2009-2010 school year, the current grade 7s will be attending ACSS and will NOT be attending the middle school because there is no space for them until the following 2010-2011 school year?
4. The current enrolment of Grade 4 at Betty Gilbert Elem. (next year’s Grade 5s) is 35 students. Will they be in a single class next year? What about class size and composition issues?
Betty Gilbert 32 42 50
Parkside 57 64 67
Shortreed 38 35 35
Total 127 141 152 Capacity 387
Roughly 4 grade 5 classes, 5 grade 6 classes, and 5 grade 7 classes for the first year of BG Middle school operations (a transition year)
The district is expecting another decrease in enrolment next year so perhaps they are anticipating just enough declines for a snug fit for 2009 – 2010.
5. Do parents understand that the school will be “very full” and there will likely be at least one permanent class in the gym, library, and/or computer lab? I was told that there would be no portables added to Betty Gilbert Middle.
6. How does the district believe that the French Immersion program can be sustained at the secondary level with only one class feeding into it? Is the district truly anticipating increasing the FI program to two classes per grade? How will this affect the regular English program in terms of funding? Does the district intend to subsidize the FI program by running smaller classes to accommodate less than full class enrolments (60 students per cohort)? What about declining enrolment and maintaining a viable FI program for the long term in this area? Is this just a stop gap remedy?
7. Do parents understand that for the first year of the middle school operations (2009-2010), students will NOT be attending ACSS for their exploration classes? So just what exactly is being planned for 2009-2010 in terms of delivering the exploration courses to the grades 6 and 7s?
8. Will the SEA’s who will be escorting the students to ACSS in the second year of operations be the same ones that are attached to students as part of their duties? Or will additional SEA’s be hired? If this is the case, why not less costly noon hour supervisors?
9. The elementary schools may not close if early Kindergarten eventually becomes a reality. The secondary school is another matter. ACSS capacity is 1100. Current enrolment is 925.
In 2009-2010 there will be 141 fewer students when the grade 7s stay back at Betty Gilbert to be in middle school. ACSS will be emptier still. What are the plans to use that extra space? Is this sustainable?
I hope that the parents of these students directly involved will find this informative and relative to the situation.
Contrary to what some have been saying, this is not just about Aldergrove and their students. The recent motion was to do a district wide review regarding middle schools. It is about middle schools across the district. Moreover, according to a couple of trustees, it is an all or nothing proposition.
This is a concern for all Langley parents and community members who care about what may happen to their child and/or grandchild's education. No one should get angry with other Langley residents who can foresee the impact this might have on the young minds and hearts they have in their care and are also voicing their opinions. What the Board decides to do will affect all Langley students....
1. Regarding the school timetable, which would sync with the high school, the blocks are roughly 77 to 80 minutes long. This is a long block even for high school students. Will these blocks be broken up into two sessions, or other shorter time frames when teaching?
2. How will the grade 8s (in the 2009-2010 school year) receive the additional 23 minutes of instruction per day?
3. Do parents understand that for the 2009-2010 school year, the current grade 7s will be attending ACSS and will NOT be attending the middle school because there is no space for them until the following 2010-2011 school year?
4. The current enrolment of Grade 4 at Betty Gilbert Elem. (next year’s Grade 5s) is 35 students. Will they be in a single class next year? What about class size and composition issues?
Betty Gilbert 32 42 50
Parkside 57 64 67
Shortreed 38 35 35
Total 127 141 152 Capacity 387
Roughly 4 grade 5 classes, 5 grade 6 classes, and 5 grade 7 classes for the first year of BG Middle school operations (a transition year)
The district is expecting another decrease in enrolment next year so perhaps they are anticipating just enough declines for a snug fit for 2009 – 2010.
5. Do parents understand that the school will be “very full” and there will likely be at least one permanent class in the gym, library, and/or computer lab? I was told that there would be no portables added to Betty Gilbert Middle.
6. How does the district believe that the French Immersion program can be sustained at the secondary level with only one class feeding into it? Is the district truly anticipating increasing the FI program to two classes per grade? How will this affect the regular English program in terms of funding? Does the district intend to subsidize the FI program by running smaller classes to accommodate less than full class enrolments (60 students per cohort)? What about declining enrolment and maintaining a viable FI program for the long term in this area? Is this just a stop gap remedy?
7. Do parents understand that for the first year of the middle school operations (2009-2010), students will NOT be attending ACSS for their exploration classes? So just what exactly is being planned for 2009-2010 in terms of delivering the exploration courses to the grades 6 and 7s?
8. Will the SEA’s who will be escorting the students to ACSS in the second year of operations be the same ones that are attached to students as part of their duties? Or will additional SEA’s be hired? If this is the case, why not less costly noon hour supervisors?
9. The elementary schools may not close if early Kindergarten eventually becomes a reality. The secondary school is another matter. ACSS capacity is 1100. Current enrolment is 925.
In 2009-2010 there will be 141 fewer students when the grade 7s stay back at Betty Gilbert to be in middle school. ACSS will be emptier still. What are the plans to use that extra space? Is this sustainable?
I hope that the parents of these students directly involved will find this informative and relative to the situation.
Contrary to what some have been saying, this is not just about Aldergrove and their students. The recent motion was to do a district wide review regarding middle schools. It is about middle schools across the district. Moreover, according to a couple of trustees, it is an all or nothing proposition.
This is a concern for all Langley parents and community members who care about what may happen to their child and/or grandchild's education. No one should get angry with other Langley residents who can foresee the impact this might have on the young minds and hearts they have in their care and are also voicing their opinions. What the Board decides to do will affect all Langley students....
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Wally Martin Starts On Line Petition To Get Trains Out Of Downtown Langley
Call Your Friends & Neighbours NOW, To Google Langley Free Press, To Sign the Petition!
Wally Martin launched an on line petition called GET THE TRAINS OUT OF DOWNTOWN LANGLEY, late on Friday, February 13.Wally's action was prompted by his ongoing passion to have what is the very best for the Langley community.
He and his wife operate the oldest hotel in BC, the 5 Star Princess and the Pea B&B, located at the Murrayville historic 5 Corners.
Together for the past 20 years they have worked tirelessly to promote tourism for themselves and for Langley.
As train tracks and roads destroy farmland they fear that Langley will slowly disintegrate into a large scale industrial wasteland and that is something that concerns them deeply.
Recent announcements of increases in train traffic through the middle of Langley as well as the public outcry about the increase of train traffic prompted him to create a petition to all levels of government to reroute the trains away from the heart of Langley and back to the original mainline railway corridor that follows both sides of the Fraser River.
He believes that this is a very viable alternative to what is presently being proposed.
Wally states, "In the 1800’s we could build a railway over 3000 miles from Ottawa to Vancouver using simple manpower, horses and hand tools. Surely with today's equipment the rerouting of 20 or 30 miles of track is a piece of cake."
Wally invites anyone to sign the petition at http://www.PetitionOnline.com/wally68/
Editors' comment: LFP has an ad link on our sidebar to your right to get to Wally's online petition....
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Mayor Green Mad at 'Threatening' Letters (The Province, 12 Feb 2009, Page A10)
Referring to Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon's unusual personalized letters delivered late Friday afternoon (see previous LFP posting) to each member of Township council, Mayor Rick Green comes out publicly today in the Province saying: "The letters are threatening. They are not appropriate." and that: "There are always other options.", obviously very strongly suggesting that he will not be supporting the overpass as presently proposed. Mayor Green has generated a lot of press recently in all the major newspapers including today's Globe & Mail as well with extensive quotes from Mayor Green on the recent gangland flurry of shootings in the Langley area as well.
Mayor mad at 'threatening' letters
BY KENT SPENCER STAFF REPORTER
The Province
12 Feb 2009
Langley residents wont be bulldozed into accepting the B.C. government's design for a rail overpass, says Township Mayor Rick Green. Green said yesterday he is not intimidated by a letter from Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon, threatening to...read more...
--MOUSE CLICK PICTURE OF PROVINCE PAGE FOR BEST VIEW BELOW--
BY KENT SPENCER STAFF REPORTER
The Province
12 Feb 2009
Langley residents wont be bulldozed into accepting the B.C. government's design for a rail overpass, says Township Mayor Rick Green. Green said yesterday he is not intimidated by a letter from Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon, threatening to...read more...
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
LFP Barred To Do Video News Report Of Aldergrove PAC's Public Town Hall Meeting!
Langley Free Press feels honoured. For the first time ever, we have drawn enough attention that our reporter/photographer was censored! What a tribute to the fact that LFP must really be making a difference and having an impact! Despite the fact that we were asked by more than one member of the taxpaying public to attend and record this public event put on by a public group at a publicly advertised town hall meeting in a public school, the organizers of this so-called public event went out of their way to specifically censor our public reporting. We are indeed humbled!
So let's see, the Aldergrove PAC's, 4 of them apparently, advertise where ever possible about a public town hall meeting held in the Gymnasium of a public High School, ACSS, tonight
7 to 9 pm. They even have
set up tables marked for the press and all the local Langley newspapers were present. The Press were taking pictures of the event. Suddenly, two male event organizers tell our Langley Free Press photographer that LFP is not permitted to take any videos of this so called public meeting at all. In fact, they even physically push our camera lens back toward our own LFP photographer telling him to take videos of himself after it is revealed that their whole discussion was being videotaped as well. (Isn't February 25, 2009 Anti-Bullying Day in BC Schools according to CKNW's campaign? What an example to set!).
The two event organizers had specifically walked directly over and said all this right after they were seen talking to one of the controversial school board members (who as a matter of fact has had some interesting experiences previously with press videos as well although never on LFP nor never even republished here on LFP!). These organizers (if in fact they were) further say that they were told that LFP was going to be taking videos and was not permitted to do so unless LFP got permission from the approx 15 head table speakers. Interestingly, when the moderator started the meeting, people were asked to turn off their cell phones but no mention was made about not videotaping. If CTV, Global or CBC camera crews were there, would they have been told to turn off their cameras? An interesting question indeed!
Curiously, the other press where permitted to be there as well with cameras and to report on the event. So why was LFP told not to video? It makes this Editor really wonder what the real issue is here. It certainly doesn't seem to be openess, transparency, democracy and free speech!
The other thing that comes to my mind is that despite all the first hand witnesses who talked to the press about the tragic Vancouver Airport Taser death, none of the reports, news reports nor the RCMP reports came an iota close to revealing what a simple cell phone video ultimately described and revealed.
So the story here on LFP is not the event but that this public meeting was censored. By who? and Why? What's the real agenda here? The fact that LFP was specifically barred from being welcome to video the very publicly advertised so-called public Town Hall meeting is very, very odd. In conclusion, just how public was this meeting? Or was it really just a grandstand opportunity for the organizers behind one of the school board slates who incidentally just happened to be endorsed by the Aldergrove MLA too!
By the way, anyone attending this meeting is encouraged to send us your reports and letters on it. We will publish them. And, if you happened to take a few videos on your cell phones - even better. Send those too!...
So let's see, the Aldergrove PAC's, 4 of them apparently, advertise where ever possible about a public town hall meeting held in the Gymnasium of a public High School, ACSS, tonight
7 to 9 pm. They even have
set up tables marked for the press and all the local Langley newspapers were present. The Press were taking pictures of the event. Suddenly, two male event organizers tell our Langley Free Press photographer that LFP is not permitted to take any videos of this so called public meeting at all. In fact, they even physically push our camera lens back toward our own LFP photographer telling him to take videos of himself after it is revealed that their whole discussion was being videotaped as well. (Isn't February 25, 2009 Anti-Bullying Day in BC Schools according to CKNW's campaign? What an example to set!).The two event organizers had specifically walked directly over and said all this right after they were seen talking to one of the controversial school board members (who as a matter of fact has had some interesting experiences previously with press videos as well although never on LFP nor never even republished here on LFP!). These organizers (if in fact they were) further say that they were told that LFP was going to be taking videos and was not permitted to do so unless LFP got permission from the approx 15 head table speakers. Interestingly, when the moderator started the meeting, people were asked to turn off their cell phones but no mention was made about not videotaping. If CTV, Global or CBC camera crews were there, would they have been told to turn off their cameras? An interesting question indeed!
Curiously, the other press where permitted to be there as well with cameras and to report on the event. So why was LFP told not to video? It makes this Editor really wonder what the real issue is here. It certainly doesn't seem to be openess, transparency, democracy and free speech!
The other thing that comes to my mind is that despite all the first hand witnesses who talked to the press about the tragic Vancouver Airport Taser death, none of the reports, news reports nor the RCMP reports came an iota close to revealing what a simple cell phone video ultimately described and revealed.
So the story here on LFP is not the event but that this public meeting was censored. By who? and Why? What's the real agenda here? The fact that LFP was specifically barred from being welcome to video the very publicly advertised so-called public Town Hall meeting is very, very odd. In conclusion, just how public was this meeting? Or was it really just a grandstand opportunity for the organizers behind one of the school board slates who incidentally just happened to be endorsed by the Aldergrove MLA too!
By the way, anyone attending this meeting is encouraged to send us your reports and letters on it. We will publish them. And, if you happened to take a few videos on your cell phones - even better. Send those too!...
Friday, February 06, 2009
Minister Falcon Says Build It Or Lose It! NO CHANGES ALLOWED! re: Mufford /Glover/64th Overpass
BREAKING NEWS ! What a coincidence! On the Friday night at 4:36 pm, just before Monday's most controversial Township Council public meeting, Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon sent a letter to Mayor & Council (SEE HIS LETTER HERE) , which says that if the Township does not go ahead with the proposed 64th street overpass (preliminary design my ass!) that the funding will be re-allocated to other Provincial projects! His letter was INDIVIDUALLY addressed to each member of council to we can only guess get maximum impact. Wonder who suggested this idea!
Talk about putting a gun to this Council's and to this community's heads! The timing is curious and one again wonders where are the Langley Waldos on this issue and what knowledge/involvement they had with this letter and when? The Langley Waldos are of course our Provincial Liberal reps like MLA Coleman, Polak and of course Coleman's protege and constituency riding president, councillor Jordan Bateman.
The sword of Damocles in this case is ~$42 million of funding that is being threatened to be withdrawn! Conspicuous timing and tactics to say the least don't you think so? So, will you still be voting for Coleman & Polak this spring? The Falcon letter was faxed at 3:34 pm and emailed to Council at 4:36Pm, the latest possible Friday afternoon timing before the Monday council meeting! Thanks to Councillor Kim Richter for emailing LFP the letter.
Also for your information late polling occurred this past week of many Township residents. The polling firm apparently identified themselves and when they were twice asked specifically who commissioned this poll, the answer twice was that it was the Township of Langley. Apparently this was not true! It is thought that the poll is actually commissioned by the Roberts Bank Rail Corridor Program Group, (the project consortium). In addition the only two answers permitted to the specific poll question was agree or disagree. There was absolutely no opportunity given for any third option such as "yes, but at a different location or design" in their poll!
The Total Langley funding from others of ~$42 million is said to be ALL at risk if Minister Falcon as threatened pulls out the province's support for anything but this design! The budget allocation sharing for this Mufford/64th overpass was previously agreed to be shared as follows:
Talk about putting a gun to this Council's and to this community's heads! The timing is curious and one again wonders where are the Langley Waldos on this issue and what knowledge/involvement they had with this letter and when? The Langley Waldos are of course our Provincial Liberal reps like MLA Coleman, Polak and of course Coleman's protege and constituency riding president, councillor Jordan Bateman.
The sword of Damocles in this case is ~$42 million of funding that is being threatened to be withdrawn! Conspicuous timing and tactics to say the least don't you think so? So, will you still be voting for Coleman & Polak this spring? The Falcon letter was faxed at 3:34 pm and emailed to Council at 4:36Pm, the latest possible Friday afternoon timing before the Monday council meeting! Thanks to Councillor Kim Richter for emailing LFP the letter.
Also for your information late polling occurred this past week of many Township residents. The polling firm apparently identified themselves and when they were twice asked specifically who commissioned this poll, the answer twice was that it was the Township of Langley. Apparently this was not true! It is thought that the poll is actually commissioned by the Roberts Bank Rail Corridor Program Group, (the project consortium). In addition the only two answers permitted to the specific poll question was agree or disagree. There was absolutely no opportunity given for any third option such as "yes, but at a different location or design" in their poll!
The Total Langley funding from others of ~$42 million is said to be ALL at risk if Minister Falcon as threatened pulls out the province's support for anything but this design! The budget allocation sharing for this Mufford/64th overpass was previously agreed to be shared as follows:
- $ 2.7 Million - Feds
- $12.5 Million - Province
- $24.7 Million - Translink
- $ 1.8 Million - Ports
- $ 9.3 Million - Township of Langley
- $51.1 Million TOTAL
- $75 Million - Feds
- $50 Million - Province
- $50 Million - Translink
- $50 Million - Ports
- $32 Million - Rail
- $50 Million - Local Municipalities
- $307 Million TOTAL
Thursday, February 05, 2009
Brown's Pit Elicits Provincial Langley MLAs Disappearing Act (Re: The Province Article, 05 Feb 2009, Page A13)
Have you noticed that on any and all major Langley issues that our Langley MLAs Rich Coleman & Mary Polak seem to pull off a traditional disappearing act with no comments nor any help on any real controversial issue. Not a peep on the LEC P3 fiasco nor on the Liberal's tragic plans for Brown Pit either and the list goes on. This silence is even more deafening with the upcoming May 12 provincial election! Not mentioned in this Lewis article is that Councillor Kim Richter got this motion approved at Monday's council meeting against the Provincial Brown's Pit plan;
"Whereas opening the Brown's Pit for gravel extraction will create considerable difficulties in the surrounding neighbourhood and could significantly and adversely impact water quality and quantity in the Hopington aquifer; therefore
Be it resolved that the material from the Brown's Pit delegations of January 19, 2009 be referred to staff for a report and a recommended action plan to stop the re-opening of this pit for gravel extraction."
Rural community wants gravel to stay in pit
Brian Lewis
The Province
05 Feb 2009
No doubt the election-bound B.C. government wants as much positive spin as possible from yesterday's announcement for the new $3.3-billion, 10-lane Port Mann Bridge. But given what they're up to in nearby Langley Township in relation to this...read more...
"Whereas opening the Brown's Pit for gravel extraction will create considerable difficulties in the surrounding neighbourhood and could significantly and adversely impact water quality and quantity in the Hopington aquifer; therefore
Be it resolved that the material from the Brown's Pit delegations of January 19, 2009 be referred to staff for a report and a recommended action plan to stop the re-opening of this pit for gravel extraction."
Brian Lewis
The Province
05 Feb 2009
No doubt the election-bound B.C. government wants as much positive spin as possible from yesterday's announcement for the new $3.3-billion, 10-lane Port Mann Bridge. But given what they're up to in nearby Langley Township in relation to this...read more...
Welcome To LA Freeway World !
Yup! This Pic sure looks like Los Angeles don't it? But it's the new $3.3 billion 10 lane Port Mann bridge replacement written about in today's Province & Sun. Now don't get me wrong, this Editor agrees with expanding the bridge but damm it why did they not simply just add an inexpensive LRT right NOW as well over the bridge through to at least 200th St. to make it way more palatable? The Vancouver yuppie bike advocates will be steaming about this one!
Wednesday, February 04, 2009
Kim Richter Acclaimed To New Kwantlen Polytechnic University Board of Governors
Langley's four term Township Councillor Kim Richter has recently been elected by acclamation by the ~ 850 faculty professors at Kwantlen Polytechnic University as one of the 15 member Board of Governors. See the press release here. Other Langley related Governors are local lawyer Rebecca Darnell & Amrik Virk, an inspector with the Langley Royal Canadian Mounted Police detachment. Kwantlen University serves approximately 10,000 students in 4 campuses in Langley, Surrey & Richmond.
Tuesday, February 03, 2009
Richter's Request To Respond To Desperate Taxpayer Request Voted Down By Township Council
In the previous recent Township Council meeting a long time Langley resident, taxpayer and local business operator/owner pleaded desperately with the Township Council to look into simply doing some inquiries to ultimately help him with gaining a short visitation access to his court seized property to simply collect some of his personal possessions.
Mr. Paul Houweling provided Township Council a long and detailed list of legal documents in which he claims that he has now exhausted any and all formal avenues of redress. His frustration finally brought him to Township Council as a last resort. In fact when he made his delegation request to council for any and all assistance, he said that he was now at his wit's end and at the point that he was even worried about providing even for his families basic needs due to the legal actions that culminated in his seizure of his property and his personal belongings, still on his previous property.
He said the bureaucratic systems to date had all but literally, financially destroyed him and his family so far and he pleaded with the Township Council to at least look at his case and see if they could as a last resort at least possibly assist him in getting access to his seized property to at least collect some of his personal belongings that he said are critical for him to rebuild his life.
"There for the sake of God go you or I ! " <--- span="" style="font-weight: bold;">LFP EDITORIAL COMMENT
Actual Council videotapes of the motion and debate can be viewed here---> Part 1 video is 5:31 minutes long and Part 2 video is 1:03 minutes long.
All of The Langley Township council except for Councillor's Richter and Kositsky voted down and against Richter's motion to get a report from the Langley RCMP on the matter. In fact Cllr. Bob Long & Steve Ferguson even argued that although the Langley Police are a sub contracted direct service paid for by Langley Taxpayers and are under the Township Council's purveyance (remember Langley policing is the single largest budget portion of the Township's annual operating budget!) that this council should NOT be involved in his request at all. Both Long & Ferguson said that they had not read the complete documentation given to them from Mr. Paul Houweling either.
Councillor Ferguson went so far as to even compare this desperate request from Mr. Paul Houweling with a police issued driving infraction! Neither he said should be interfered with essentially. He also said that Mr. Paul Houweling was well know to him personally and in the Langley community. In this Editor's opinion by default aren't they are basically closing the door on any or all requests by the public when it comes to the Langley Police services? Councillor Ferguson even went so far as to essentially say that getting a simple Langley Police report on his desperate matter was too costly an expense (WOW - WHAT caring? - WHAT Priorities?)
Councillor Richter's motion was a very short simple, reasonable and caring request that even she said may not possibly go anywhere to assist him but that she felt it important to at least inquire about. Her motion specifically said;
"I move that Council refer Mr. Houweling's delegation request to the RCMP to address his concerns as best as they can and report back to council."
She later added that her motion was;
"..in no way shape or form is this motion asking, ordering or intending to order the RCMP to conduct an investigation. It's simply asking the police to look into the delegation request made last week and report back whether or not there is any concerns that are valid and justifiable."
and finally Richter says;
"I think that's our (council's) job, to help the public, and if we are not going to help the public we probably shouldn't be sitting up here ( Langley Council table)."
This Editor was told that Mr. Paul Houweling in his delegation request also told the councillors that he had talked about his issues with Langley's RCMP top cop in charge, Superintendent Janice Armstrong and had asked her to attend the same evening council meeting when he made his delegation request to Township Council. In fact she DID attend that evening meeting and even sat right beside Mr. Paul Houweling in the audience! The superintendent rarely if ever attends the council meetings to be just an observer! Yet this Council in it's once again questionable wisdom chose to not even look at his desperate issue!
Kudos to Councillors Richter & Kositsky. Shame on the rest of Township Council.
In closing all this Editor can say in summary again is "There for the sake of God go you or I ! " and as Richter said, "...if we are not going to help the public we probably shouldn't be sitting up here ( Langley Council table)." ...
Mr. Paul Houweling provided Township Council a long and detailed list of legal documents in which he claims that he has now exhausted any and all formal avenues of redress. His frustration finally brought him to Township Council as a last resort. In fact when he made his delegation request to council for any and all assistance, he said that he was now at his wit's end and at the point that he was even worried about providing even for his families basic needs due to the legal actions that culminated in his seizure of his property and his personal belongings, still on his previous property.
He said the bureaucratic systems to date had all but literally, financially destroyed him and his family so far and he pleaded with the Township Council to at least look at his case and see if they could as a last resort at least possibly assist him in getting access to his seized property to at least collect some of his personal belongings that he said are critical for him to rebuild his life.
"There for the sake of God go you or I ! " <--- span="" style="font-weight: bold;">LFP EDITORIAL COMMENT
Actual Council videotapes of the motion and debate can be viewed here---> Part 1 video is 5:31 minutes long and Part 2 video is 1:03 minutes long.
All of The Langley Township council except for Councillor's Richter and Kositsky voted down and against Richter's motion to get a report from the Langley RCMP on the matter. In fact Cllr. Bob Long & Steve Ferguson even argued that although the Langley Police are a sub contracted direct service paid for by Langley Taxpayers and are under the Township Council's purveyance (remember Langley policing is the single largest budget portion of the Township's annual operating budget!) that this council should NOT be involved in his request at all. Both Long & Ferguson said that they had not read the complete documentation given to them from Mr. Paul Houweling either.
Councillor Ferguson went so far as to even compare this desperate request from Mr. Paul Houweling with a police issued driving infraction! Neither he said should be interfered with essentially. He also said that Mr. Paul Houweling was well know to him personally and in the Langley community. In this Editor's opinion by default aren't they are basically closing the door on any or all requests by the public when it comes to the Langley Police services? Councillor Ferguson even went so far as to essentially say that getting a simple Langley Police report on his desperate matter was too costly an expense (WOW - WHAT caring? - WHAT Priorities?)
Councillor Richter's motion was a very short simple, reasonable and caring request that even she said may not possibly go anywhere to assist him but that she felt it important to at least inquire about. Her motion specifically said;
"I move that Council refer Mr. Houweling's delegation request to the RCMP to address his concerns as best as they can and report back to council."
She later added that her motion was;
"..in no way shape or form is this motion asking, ordering or intending to order the RCMP to conduct an investigation. It's simply asking the police to look into the delegation request made last week and report back whether or not there is any concerns that are valid and justifiable."
and finally Richter says;
"I think that's our (council's) job, to help the public, and if we are not going to help the public we probably shouldn't be sitting up here ( Langley Council table)."
This Editor was told that Mr. Paul Houweling in his delegation request also told the councillors that he had talked about his issues with Langley's RCMP top cop in charge, Superintendent Janice Armstrong and had asked her to attend the same evening council meeting when he made his delegation request to Township Council. In fact she DID attend that evening meeting and even sat right beside Mr. Paul Houweling in the audience! The superintendent rarely if ever attends the council meetings to be just an observer! Yet this Council in it's once again questionable wisdom chose to not even look at his desperate issue!
Kudos to Councillors Richter & Kositsky. Shame on the rest of Township Council.
In closing all this Editor can say in summary again is "There for the sake of God go you or I ! " and as Richter said, "...if we are not going to help the public we probably shouldn't be sitting up here ( Langley Council table)." ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)