Category Archives: BC Politics

A Destructive Political Divide, One We May Not Be Able to Bridge

May 7, 2018BC Politics, Politics, Vancouver Votes 2018Raymond Tomlin

A new & destructive political divide has opened on our political landscape

In the age of Trump, a great chasm has opened on our political landscape, one that — despite the best of intentions — may not be able to be bridged.
On the one side, you have that portion of Vancouver’s population who reside in multi-million dollar homes located predominantly in Yaletown and southeast False Creek, West Point Grey, Dunbar, Kerrisdale and Shaughnessy, whose populations turn out in droves — up to 85% of residents in these neighbourhoods arriving at their local pollings station on election day to cast their ballot — to vote for the Vancouver Non-Partisan Association, the corporately-funded-and-backed municipal political party that has, for generations, protected their class and economic interests.

These are the folks — pictured above — who rallied last week at West Point Grey’s Trimble Park to oppose a move by the BC NDP government to impose a school surtax on homes worth more than $3 million, a newly-created tax that would see a westside homeowner who owns an $8-million home paying an extra $18,000 in property taxes, annually, to the province.
The mainly westside residents think it unfair, after decades of right-of-centre B.C. Liberal / Socred provincial governments, and the right-of-centre Vancouver Non-Partisan Association pulling the levers of civic government, that new wealth taxes be imposed on them so that government can better fund our public education system (from which the B.C. Liberal government cut $58.3 million in funding in Vancouver each year from 2002 to 2015), build affordable homes to house the 50% of seniors in our city living on less than $26,000 a year, the construction of affordable housing, and provision of funding for the one in five children in Vancouver who live in poverty.
In order words, these are the Darwinian “I’m all right, Jack, you make out of life what you put into it, I’m not responsible for you” folks. Nice.

On the other side of this great political chasm, you have folks like United Church Minister and current OneCity Vancouver candidate for Vancouver City Council, Christine Boyle — and her progressively-minded colleagues in OneCity, Vision Vancouver, COPE, the Greens and TeamJean, the latter of which group’s core organizing philosophy revolves around “building the city we need”, a fairer, more inclusive and more just city for all of us, whether we live in the sometimes blighted Downtown Eastside neighbourhood where residents have come together in solidarity to build a vibrant community of the caring and compassionate, or Strathcona, Hastings Sunrise, Riley Park, Grandview Woodland, and any one of Vancouver’s 23 diverse neighbourhoods where housing is acknowledged as a right, and where the elimination of poverty and wont is a central operating principle of the five progressive parties offering candidates in the upcoming civic election.
The latter grouping of political parties have reached out a hand to those in our community who have been deemed to be “wealthy”, by dint of income or housing status, have attempted to bridge the political divide, thus far to no good effect. All of this is not to say, either, that there are not many good persons of conscience resident in Yaletown, West Point Grey, Dunbar, Kerrisdale and Shaughnessy who are at present, and as has been the case for some while now, working with their neighbours & with civic parties like OneCity Vancouver in common cause to acknowledge that Vancouver is, indeed, one city, comprised of diverse peoples from every socio-economic strata and circumstance, who live together in the village that is Vancouver, where we are — each and every one of us — responsible for one another.
For as President-elect John Fitzgerald Kennedy stated in an address (abridged) to the Massachusetts legislature, on January 9th, 1961 …

For those to whom much is given, much is required. And when at some future date the high court of history sits in judgment on each of us — recording whether in our brief span of service we fulfilled our responsibilities to the state — our success or failure, in whatever office we hold, will be measured by the answers to four questions:

First, were we courageous, possessed of the courage to stand up to our adversaries, to stand up when necessary, to resist public pressure, when such pressure does not serve the common good?

Secondly, were we possessed of good judgment — with perceptive judgment of the future as well as the past — of our mistakes as well as the mistakes of others — with enough wisdom to know what we did not know and enough candour to admit it?

Third, were we possessed of integrity, who never ran out on either the principles in which we believed or the public who believed in us — women and men whom neither financial gain nor political ambition could ever divert from the fulfillment of our sacred trust?

Finally, were we truly women and men of dedication — with an honour mortgaged to no single individual or group, and comprised of no private obligation or aim, but devoted solely to serving the public good? Courage — judgment — integrity — dedication — these are the historic qualities which must characterize the conduct of governance, in every city and in every region of our fair nation, in the four turbulent years that lie ahead.

And so it is. The divide in our city must be bridged, if at all possible, in the current civic election cycle, by the political figures who would seek to govern our city over the next four years, beginning in November of this year, each of whom must be governed by the notion of implementing legislation and policies based on what is best for all, and not one particular interest group — which for too long has been the overriding foundation of government in our province and, far too often, in our city.

We must together realize that, in principle and in fact, we are our brothers and sisters keepers, that collectively we have an obligation to one another, and that as has been stated: to whom much is given, much is expected.
In the coming election, let us all come together as one, let us bridge the chasm that would seem to divide us, let us work together to ensure that modular housing is built in neighbourhoods across our city (let’s make sure, too, that there is adequate, respectful, information-filled, and inclusive consultation with residents in neighbourhoods, as a pre-condition to the taking of decisions to construct that housing).
And, that new and truly affordable housing co-ops are constructed on city land, as homes for families across all of Vancouver’s 23 neighbourhoods; that Vancouver City Council work with the provincial government to ensure supportive social housing is built, opened and properly and humanely administered in the housing of those in need; that the tax structure at City Hall for small business, which is such a burden for small business operators, is moved to the multi-national companies in our town, who pay woefully less in business tax than is fair and proper — in the process, this transfer of tax responsibility to “big business” relieving the beleaguered home owner of the burden of annual titanic property tax increases; and that Vancouver continue to move forward as we’ve written previously, and will continue to write, to become a city defined by inclusion, social justice, and a city that truly serves the needs of all of Vancouver’s diverse citizenry.

Adriane Carr. MAYOR !!! How Many Times Do We Have to Say It?

May 3, 2018BC Politics, Vancouver, Vancouver Votes 2018Raymond Tomlin

Time for some basic math on the Mayoral nomination 2018 Vancouver civic nomination front. Hey you, fine folks with OneCity Vancouver (the folks we are head-over-heels in love with this election cycle), Alison and Anna, Cara and David and Christine. Hey you, Derrick and Riaz and Maddy and Laura and Wendy (and, you too, Jean) on TeamJean — the hardest-working, best organized, most enthusiastic and focused vanguard of folks we’ve witnessed since, gosh, at least the 1970s.
And, hey you, Connie and Rider, Gary and Carol (and, you too, Justine) on the COPE train to freedom and social justice. Hey you, social justice warriors on the Vision Vancouver team, that’d be you Catherine Evans, Heather Deal & Finance Chair on Vancouver City Council, Raymond Louie. And, hey, you Pete Fry and Jacquie Miller (enjoy your freedom while the enjoying is good, cuz law school at UVIC in the fall — well, it’s gonna keep you busy!), and you, too, Mike Wiebe and Stuart Mackinnon and Janet Fraser and Estrellita Gonzalez, with the Greens — and that includes you, too, Adriane Carr Mayoral aspirant, two-term Vancouver City Councillor, your visage so lovingly captured in the warmly re-assuring photograph published yesterday in the Charlie-Smith-edited Georgia Straight.
Adriane Carr, beloved Vancouver City Councillor, expresses her interest in seeking the Mayor’s chair; her party endorses her at their recent AGM. Around the same time, former Visionista and all-around good person, Shauna Sylvester “soft launches” a campaign to become Vancouver’s next Mayor. Meanwhile, COPE thinks — whoops, first, to correct the record, we’re going to quote COPE candidate for City Council, Anne Roberts …

“Raymond, I’m not particularly worried about inaccuracies in your column last week about Patrick Condon, but I would like to set the record straight, especially when it to the comes to the involvement of others, and hear I am thinking about the reference you made concerning current COPE co-chair Connie Hubbs, that she had not met, nor was she aware of Patrick Condon prior to my raising his name with her as, perhaps, a potential “unity candidate” for Mayor, or maybe running under the COPE banner, or possibly as an independent who COPE could support.

In words of one syllable: that’s wrong.

Here are the true facts of the matter: Some months ago I e-mailed Patrick in a spontaneous moment of inspiration, after having read what I found to be an inspiring piece of journalism, a column that he’d written for The Tyee. In an e-mail I posted to him, I re-introduced myself to Patrick, who I had first met when sitting as a COPE member on City Council, when COPE held power at Vancouver City Hall, from 2002 – 2005.

In my e-mail to Patrick, I asked him if he had ever considered running for office.

Patrick replied that he indeed had been thinking of exactly that.

It turned out that he’d been talking to the Greens for the past year about running with them for a position on Vancouver City Council. I’m not sure whether Patrick is still interested in that (ed. note. Patrick may or may not be. But the Green Party folks VanRamblings has spoken with would be over-the-moon with a Patrick Condon candidacy for Vancouver City Council). In the e-mail that I posted to him, I suggested that if he could see himself running as some kind of “unity” candidate for the Mayor’s Chair, I thought it possible, perhaps even probable, that in addition to the Greens, COPE, OneCity & TeamJean might be open to a Mayoral run by him in the 2018 Vancouver municipal election.

I told Patrick that I would try to arrange some sort of meeting to discuss possibilities.

Given that Patrick was just about to set off on his sabbatical, we had just a day or two to invite interested parties. We ended up with COPE and TeamJean meeting at my house. You guessed it: Connie Hubbs — you know, COPE’s co-chair — was at that meeting, many months ago, where we all had an enlightening conversation about the city needing to take a much stronger stand on the provision of affordable — and social — housing, focusing on transportation policies for the City of Vancouver that would not only prove to be cost-effective but environmentally responsible and neighbourhood-sustaining.

We also talked about a key plank in Jean Swanson’s bid for a seat on City Council during her by-election run last year, the Mansion Tax that is already in effect — as it has been for some while — in Seattle, and various other critical issues of importance to the Vancouver electorate.

I assure you, Raymond, contrary to what you posted on VanRamblings early in your coverage of the current civic election cycle, that much prior to the meeting the group of us had a few months back with Patrick Condon, Connie Hubbs had read a significant body of work that had been written by Patrick over the years, in addition to a surfeit of academic, mainstream press, journal and other articles where he had been interviewed, contributing his thoughts on sustainable city building.

Before Connie — in her capacity as COPE co-chair — talked to the media, she had been in e-mail communication with Patrick on multiple occasions, and had on numerous occasions been a part of live Skype video conversations COPE and TeamJean were having with Patrick while he was on his sabbatical, and distant from Vancouver. Connie was anything but ill-informed. Hope this sets the record straight.

…well (continuing from above), the 50-year-strong Coalition of Progressive Electors — and, apparently, Team Jean — think (as Anne relates), “Hey, a Patrick Condon for Mayor “unity” candidacy for Mayor. Worth exploring.”

Okay, here’s where the math comes in.
Shauna Sylvester tells VanRamblings and anyone in the mainstream media who will listen, that if Adriane Carr decides to launch a bid for the Mayor’s job, she’ll close up shop on her announced, and still yet hardly energetic mayoral bid. Meanwhile, Patrick Condon has said from the outset, “If Adriane Carr decides to run for Mayor, I’ll be supporting her.”
Math time. Three possible progressive candidates for Mayor. Two prepared to withdraw: leaves one progressive candidate for Mayor: Adriane Carr.
Yippee! Hallelujah! What’s that, you say? OneCity Vancouver ain’t playin’ ball with an Adriane for Mayor candidacy. Vision, well heck, although they haven’t weighed in on an Adriane for Mayor candidacy, you can bet that both parties — all set to meet with the good, worker-and-family defending Vancouver & District Labour Council this weekend — well, OneCity and Vision will be on board with an Adriane for Mayor candidacy if that’s what the good folks — such as VDLC President, Stephen von Sychowski, who we interviewed yesterday — get around to cottonin’ onto the notion that, “Hey. Maybe, just maybe, Adriane Carr for Vancouver Mayor, running as a “unity Mayor” under the Green banner that is so important to her, maybe that’s not such a bad thing, after all. In fact, maybe that’s a good thing.”
In the meantime, Ms. Carr — if we might address you directly — we read Carlito Pablo’s interview with you in The Straight yesterday (hey, you two, Adriane and Carlito we’re talking to you, you gotta phone us at home, or on our cell, if you find yourself just plain confused about something that’s been written on VanRamblings that is concerning to you, so we can set about to “make things right”, to lessen any confusion you may be experiencing).
Okay, Adriane. Listen up and listen tight. Here’s what you told Carlito yesterday …

“If it turns out that I don’t get the support, and I end up running for Council, I love what I do at Council, and I think that I play a very key role in pushing ideas that other parties don’t at the council table”

“So either way, my hope is that I would be serving the city of Vancouver and the citizens of Vancouver. That really is my bottom line. Whether it’s as Mayor or as Councillor is going to be determined by a) the citizens themselves in terms of their support, and b) the other parties.”

VanRamblings reads a bit of fatalism in your comments to Carlito, Adriane. Seems to us that you may be thinking, Mayor? Maybe, maybe not.
VanRamblings would suggest to you, our most esteemed Councillor Carr, that it is too early, as you suggest above, to make a decision either way. Wait to see what happens at the VDLC meetings this weekend.

And, oh yeah, some advice from us: read only the good things written about you on VanRamblings — ignore the rest (really, honest, ignore the rest … clearly, the more dispiriting things that are written about you on VanRamblings are the work of a dangerous and deranged mind).
Councillor Carr, your candidacy for Mayor is not over before it’s begun. Puh-leeze (forgive us for being impolite). Even if it appears to you that it’s “over” or even that it may be over — it’s not. VanRamblings talks with everyone — believe us when we write, an Adriane Carr for Vancouver Mayor mayoral bid is far, far, far, far, far, far from over. Honest. Cross our heart & hope not to die anytime soon — been there, done that, it’s no fun.
You’re just getting started, Ms. Carr — wait for folks to rally around you, and they will, and all will be well with the world, all will come together as it is meant to, and you, Patrick Condon and Pete Fry (sorry, Mike), and Christine Boyle and two of Brandon Yan, Ben Bolliger or RJ Aquino, Catherine Evans and one of Raymond Louie or Heather Deal, the spectacularly wonderful and principled Anne Roberts and an as-yet-undecided second COPE / Team Jean candidate will ascend to Vancouver City Hall on the glorious and captivating evening of Saturday, October 20th, when a new and progressive and affordable-housing-supplying, and worker-interest-defending Mayor and Council — working with our incredibly wonderful John Horgan provincial government, and “Hey, you can make a deal with him” Prime Minister Justin Trudeau — will transform Vancouver into a new Valhalla, a social justice warrior’s paradise by the sea.

Stephen von Sychowski, President of the Vancouver & District Labour Council

Yesterday afternoon, VanRamblings was afforded the opportunity to speak with a very bright, articulate and supremely socially-skilled President of the Vancouver & District Labour Council, elected to the position in February following the retirement of the equally wonderful, socially-skilled & incredibly well-organized, Joey Hartman — who recently told VanRamblings that, from the outset of her election to the position at the VDLC, she had let everyone know that she would stay for seven years, and not a moment longer. Stephen von Sychowski succeeds Joey — and man, oh man (and woman, of course), we who live in Vancouver are fortunate to have two such strong-minded people on our side, fighting for us each and every day.
VanRamblings came away from our brief conversation with Mr. von Sychowski thinking that, if there is anyone on the planet who might ‘broker a deal’ with the five, disparate — yet uniformly progressive — Vancouver civic parties, it is recently-elected VDLC President, Stephen von Sychowski.
You know how some people are gifted with emotional intelligence, have within them an innate understanding of both the human psyche and the human heart, are that rare breed of human being who are born leaders, inspiring and possessed of a fidelity of spirit and goodness that the moment you feel and see it, a calmness washes over you, a feeling of safety and self-assuredness invests your spirit? Meet Stephen von Sychowski. Wow!
Prior to speaking with Stephen (pronounced Stef-awn), we were a little querulous about the potential for success of this weekend’s upcoming May 6th / 7th ‘broker a deal’ meeting at the VDLC offices. Not any more.
In Stephen’s own words …

“The objective of the Labour Council — continuing with the work in which we’ve engaged these past months with the five progressive parties who will field candidates in the upcoming Vancouver civic election — will be to encourage co-operation between the five groups, or at minimum an accommodation between the progressive forces in this city, around the coming election, to ensure that we don’t have a repeat of the by-election last fall where, despite the vast majority of Vancouver citizens voting for progressive candidates the NPA was elected because of the fact that those majority votes were split fives ways.

Clearly, to progressive voters in Vancouver that’s an unacceptable scenario, and one that is detrimental to their interests. Losing progressive government in Vancouver as a result of the inability of folks to work together is simply not a circumstance that our members — and we feel quite certain, representatives from COPE, Team Jean, OneCity, Vision Vancouver and the Greens cannot and will not allow to occur again.

This weekend, the Vancouver & District Labour Council will engage in a more formal discussion with representatives from the five progressive civic parties, than has been the case to date.

Mediated representatives from the Labour Council will work with the five civic parties, as we hope to achieve — if not this Sunday, then in the coming days — an agreement respecting how many candidates would run in order to minimize vote-splitting.

The citizens of Vancouver deserve a civic government that is on their side, an elected Mayor and majority City Council who will work with the federal and provincial governments to ensure a supply of affordable, member-owned housing co-operatives built on city and Crown land, and who will work to ensure that transit for children under the age of 12 is free, will work with the provincial government to eliminate poverty and wont in our city, will work to ensure that city workers are treated fairly, and that a negotiated collective agreement will set the standard for municipal employee collective agreements across the region, and our province.

For VanRamblings’ complete coverage of #VancouverVotes2018, click on this link. VanRamblings continues to publish civic election coverage Monday thru Thursday and will do so through the end of August, at which point our civic election coverage will transform daily into Vancouver municipal election coverage, through until Election Day October 20th, leaving our Friday VanRamblings to ‘arts coverage’ (tomorrow, with coverage of the DOXA Documentary Film Festival — although you’ll want to read yesterday’s column on the DOXA débuting, Harry Rankin: Legacy of a Radical, which kicks off our socialist / feminist / activist / COPE-member friend, Selina Crammond’s first-ever Vancouver-based doc festival where she’s the head honcho Programme Director — yippee, Ms. Crammond!), with Saturdays given over to —&#32commencing this weekend — Stories of a Life (we’ve all got ’em), and on Sundays … who knows?

Harry Rankin: Legacy of a Radical | Vancouver’s Cherished Politico

May 2, 2018BC Politics, Cinema, Politics, Vancouver, Vancouver Votes 2018Raymond Tomlin

Harry Rankin: Legacy of a Radical
Première of Teresa Alfeld’s new documentary film
17th annual DOXA Documentary Film Festival
Thursday, May 3rd, 2018, at 7pm
Venue: The Vancouver Playhouse, 600 Hamilton Street, just off Dunsmuir
SOLD OUT DÉBUT SCREENING
Tickets still available for the Tuesday, May 8th repeat screening

Cantankerous, opinionated, possessed of a pithy and often biting sense of humour — particularly around the Vancouver City Council table, where he sat, but more often stood on his feet, championing the interests of working people and the most vulnerable among us, the nemesis of veteran, ‘right-of-centre’ Vancouver Non-Partisan Association City Councillor George Puil (seeing the two of them go toe-to-toe in Council chambers was to witness transcendence and deliverance on Earth) who, if the whole truth be known, loved Harry Rankin as much as the rest of us (if not more), which is to say almost to distraction, for Harry Rankin was a charismatic figure who every Vancouver citizen loved — absolutely adored — as a great orator and champion of the public interest, whose often boisterous conduct at Council was tempered with a huge dollop of humility, and inveterate good cheer.
Harry, who died at the age of 82, on February 26th 2002 — his passing mourned by everyone who ever knew, or knew of, him — ran for civic office more than a dozen times before being elected to Vancouver City Council in 1966 as the sole independent “alderman”, as elected officials were called back then, sitting as the lone voice and soul champion of working people in Vancouver, on a City Council that was dominated by the corporate-minded, and ultra-conservative Non-Partisan Association.
In 1968, Harry was instrumental in co-founding — along with the Vancouver & District Labour Council — the Committee (now, Coalition) of Progressive Electors (COPE), who this year celebrate 50 years of championing the interests of working people, and the vulnerable among us, a legacy of caring among progressive political parties in Vancouver which has no equal. Teresa Alfeld’s new documentary on the legacy of Harry Rankin, offers a fitting tribute to a champion of the people, a political figure for whom most held great affection, others seeing him as “polarizing.”
In her interview with Ms. Alfeld, veteran PostMedia arts critic Dana Gee writes that “while the film outlines all Harry Rankin’s social causes and policies, the film doesn’t mythologize him to the point of revisionist history. There is no shying away from Rankin’s sexist views, views that had him once call fellow Councillor, a member of the NPA, Helen Boyce, “stupid.”

“As a feminist filmmaker of course I am disappointed, but I am not surprised. We work with it. We don’t shy away, and we don’t pretend things were different because we love Harry and we love his politics,” filmmaker Teresa Alfeld stated to Ms. Gee is the course of her interview.

So, yes, Harry Rankin: Legacy of a Radical is not hagiography, but as Ms. Alfeld avers …

“I think 2018 is the year to see this film and to understand as citizens we have a choice and a responsibility to get involved and to think about the kind of city that we want to live in.”

Although Thursday’s début screening of Ms. Alfeld’s film is sold out, there is one final DOXA screening of Harry Rankin: Legacy of a Radical on Tuesday, tickets available by clicking the link at the top of today’s post.

Perhaps it is fitting that the final word on the making of Harry Rankin: Legacy of a Radical should be given to the person who played a central role in getting the film made, retired Park Board Commissioner and Vancouver City Councillor Tim Louis, who raised the funds necessary for Teresa Alfeld to spend two years of her life in the making of a film, which — along with the invaluable contribution of Phil Rankin, whose Vancouver law practice is much in the tradition of his celebrated lawyer father, and who along with many others, including the work of Peter Smilksy, who gathered together clippings & memorabilia during Harry’s 1986 candidacy for Mayor, shooting 33 reels of 16mm film, with the intent of making a documentary in 1986 — along with the monetary contributions of good people, made the début of DOXA’s screening of Harry Rankin: Legacy of a Radical possible.
Here, then, is political activist Tim Louis, on his friend Harry Rankin …

“Harry played a key role in my decision to go to law school – intervening on my behalf with the university, and supportive through all my years at UBC Law School, bringing me into his office as an articling law student near the end of my university days, and hiring me following my graduation from law school. Throughout the 20+ years I knew and worked with Harry, up until the time of his passing in 2002, and throughout the early years of his mentorship of me when I worked long hours with Harry in his law office just off Gastown, Harry politicized me — and in consequence, and I say this unabashedly, Harry is responsible for my political career.

In my time on Park Board, in the 1990s, and as a Vancouver City Councillor and Finance Committee Chair on the majority, progressive COPE 2002 – 2005 Vancouver City Council, I adhered to the advice Harry gave me early on in my political career …

“Don’t waffle. Get to the point. See past all the bafflegab.” Harry taught me to always treat the public with respect, because at the end of the day, it is the public, the working people of our city, who are the employers of the elected officials who sit at the Council table, in the Park Board meeting room, or in the large meeting room at the Vancouver School Board.”

Harry Rankin’s Political Legacy

“Harry’s legacy to the citizens of Vancouver remains to this day the acknowldegment that we, as citizens of Vancouver, have an obligation to care for one another, to care for all of our neighbours, every one of us resident in any one of the 23 neighbourhoods that make Vancouver the welcoming and diverse city that is has become.

Harry’s success as a political figure in the history of British Columbia, and Vancouver city governance, was due in no small part to the role he played in championing and giving voice to the interests of working families and children, and the vulnerable among us.”

If you don’t have a ticket for Thursday’s début screening of Harry Rankin: Legacy of a Radical, VanRamblings urges you to attend DOXA’s second and final screening of the film, this upcoming Tuesday, May 8th at 6pm, at SFU Goldcorp Theatre, adjacent to the Woodward’s building downtown.

Engaging in the Life of the City | On Presenting to Council

May 2, 2018BC Politics, Politics, VanRamblingsRaymond Tomlin

With the well-attended protest Tuesday evening by residents of West Point Grey, Dunbar, Kerrisdale and Shaughnessy — demanding of our provincial government that Finance Minister Carole James reverse the imposition of a newly-created school surtax that will see homeowners living in homes assessed at more than $3 million (you know, the wildly sympathetic 1%) paying up to an additional $26,000 per year in property tax, or as Georgia Straight editor, Charlie Smith, writes in an opinion piece published today …

“It’s disingenuously called a school tax, but the money goes into general revenue. The so-called “additional school tax on high-valued properties” imposes a 0.2 percent levy on residential portions assessed between $3 and $4 million, starting in 2019.

That adds up to $2,000 in extra property tax per year.

For the residential portion above $4 million, there will be a 0.4 percent tax rate applied. That adds an additional $4,000 in property tax per $1 million in assessed value. Anyone who owns an $8-million home, for example, would end up paying an extra $18,000 in property taxes to the province.

Last evening’s Trimble Park protest of the wealthy following a day of boisterous and demanding protest at Vancouver City Hall, with protesters demanding of our civic and provincial governments, the immediate commencement of construction of thousands of new, affordable homes to house not just the homeless, the working poor and seniors, but those first responders and wage earners raising their families in Vancouver, a city where the average “affordable” studio apartment rent starts at $1750 (and this, on the east side of the city!), with $2450 a starting point for a one-bedrooms, $2800 to $3450 the range for a two-bedrooms, with more than $4000 each month established as the market rate for a three-bedroom apartment, the imposition by the John Horgan BC NDP of the “school tax” necessary to fund affordable housing, and to help the tens of thousands of children enrolled in British Columbia’s public education system to be lifted out of poverty and wont, where children might attend the school in the neighbourhood, having slept in a home that provides safe haven and security for them, an important provincial government social justice initiative, long overdue and absolutely and utterly necessary.
Protests garner attention, be they organized by the weathy or our society’s disenfranchised, the media eager to provide coverage.
Sometimes — but not often — the protests result in a near immediate change to government policy. Old fogey and democrat that we are, and as many protests as we are wont to attend — and we do, because it is of critical importance that we stand with our neighbours, friends, our sisters and our brothers to demand that citizen voices be heard on a societal issues of concern — VanRamblings believes even more strongly in a thoughtful and empowering engagement with government, in multi-faceted campaigns designed to impact on the decision-making of government.
Through the composition of and posting of pointed, poignant, thoughtful, well-researched and well-argued hand-delivered letters to the offices of our elected officials and government administrators; along with reams and stacks of hand-delivered, signed petitions containing hundreds and thousands of signatures, arguing to our electeds that citizen voices must be heard on issues respecting the livability of our city and province, we can make a difference.
Or, when a specific issue of concern to you and your neighbours has been placed on — as will be explored below, in this instance on — a City Council’s agenda, VanRamblings believes strongly in a thoughtful and empowering engagement with government, a respectful engagement that encourages reasoned and thoughtful input into the final decision-making that will take place around the Council room table, towards making ours a more just city, region and province.

New Westminster, British Columbia, City Council Chambers

Monday evening, an activist friend of VanRamblings presented to New Westminster City Council, having already forwarded to the members of Council an expression of concern regarding issues of ingress and egress from her multi-family dwelling condominium complex respecting a proposed condominium complex that is to be built adjacent to my friend’s existing multi-family building, being presented to Council on Monday evening, with a recommendation for approval by senior staff employed within New Westminster’s Planning and Development Services Department.
In addition to concerns respecting ingress & egress, in her hand-delivered letter to the Mayor and each Councillor, my friend expressed concerns as to privacy respecting the overheight, glass-fronted balcony, bay window facing “wall of clear glass” building that would have her new neighbours looking directly into my friend’s home, and that of her neighbours.
In respect of the proposed condominium complex presented Monday evening to Council for approval, not to put too fine a point on the matter, in its currently-proposed configuration, my friend argued, the new building was utterly unacceptable to her, her husband and her neighbours.
If changes were not made to the configuration of the proposed new condominium, my friend and her neighbours would suffer grievous harm.
The proposed new complex is to be constructed within the well-consulted-upon, neighbourbood-negotiated-and-approved RS2-CD77 zoned neighbourhood, and given that the complex in order for it to be built in its currently proposed configuration would require of Council their approval of several relaxations of the zoning bylaw, relaxations that would confer a much ‘healthier’ economic benefit to the developer bringing the proposal forward, to the detriment of the interests of my friend and her neighbours, my friend would argue, “relaxations” respecting height, density, frontage to the street, and overshadowing would result in a condominium complex that would work a hardship on her and her aggrieved neighbours.
My friend would argue to New Westminster City Council, that Mayor and Council must not approve the development at their Monday evening meeting, that Council must send the plans for the new condominium complex back to the Planning Department, not for further consultation — because no consultation had ever taken place with her, her husband or her neighbours, resident in the building that would be most greatly impacted by the proposed new condominium complex — and if Council were to do such, my friend would argue, it is entirely likely that the commencement of a respectful consultation process with she and her neighbours would result in the development of an in-character to the neighbourhood building, reconfigured to reflect the addressing of the concerns she and her neighbours had raised in their letters and presentations to Council.
Presenting to Council. Daunting that.
In the days prior to presenting to Council, VanRamblings was asked, “Do you have advice for me before I address Council on Monday evening, any pearly words of wisdom that will help make this most difficult situation I face in addressing Council somewhat easier for me, because speaking before members of an elected body is not something that is usual for me, and if I am to tell you the truth, hardly constitutes for me a comforting and welcoming diversion from the protean concerns of my daily life.”

Here is what VanRamblings wrote to my friend, advice that pertains to you should you ever present to Council, which VanRamblings believes you should do often, an aspect of your civic responsibility you should not — and must not — forego, if you are to feel the life of the city deep within you, your participation in civic affairs the lifeblood of our city.

1. Don’t be nervous. Sometimes, it’s okay to be nervous — but you don’t have to be. Focus on the information you’re imparting. When you set about to relay to Council the issues of importance to you, any
nervousness will fade into the background, because your presentation is not about you — it’s about imparting information of value to help the Councillors you’ll meet on Monday evening make the proper, the humane, the necessary and the right decision, for you, for them, and for New Westminster, a decision that will serve not only to represent you and your husband’s interests, but that of your neighbours, as well as all the citizens of New Westminster, and perhaps, most importantly, the interests of the City Councillors who you’ll be addressing Monday night — because you have to know that they want to do the right thing, they really do. Let them know that you believe they want to do the right thing.

2. Introduce yourself, tell them a little about yourself and your husband, humanize yourself for them, let them know where you live — describing your neighbourhood in near-poetic terms. That’ll take 45 seconds of your allotted five minutes, but it’s a good, humanizing and important to do.

3. Stay calm, stay focused, don’t raise your voice, but do speak firmly, clearly and with authority, and with that good ol’ fashioned wit and charm for which you are so well known.

4. Be respectful.

5. Do not refer to the developer — or any good that the development might do (the developer can speak for herself quite well enough).

6. Decide on three (four, at the most) key points you want to make: the exhaust from the cars coming to and from the parkade of the newly-proposed building, exhaust that will filter directly into the apartments in your building, exhaust fumes that will be a hazard and will impinge on the quality of life for the resident owners in your condominium; the overview / privacy concerns; the necessity of sober second thought on the development proposal and the absolute necessity of Council sending it back to Planning for further consultation. DO NOT use the word disingenuous when speaking with the members of Council, do not call out the process — that will be off-putting for them, and for the members of the Planning Department who will be present Monday night — and who, if all works out well for you, you’ll be working with to come up with a new, livable and much more appropriate development for the neighbourhood.

And in closing, I reminded her, “You’ve got five minutes. Stay calm, focused, be of good cheer, but dead serious, be respectful, and be appreciative that Council is affording you an opportunity to speak to them.”

Alas. In the wee hours of yesterday morning, I learned from my friend — a person of salty countenance — that she had “slipped up” … twice.
During my friend’s address to Council, forgetting herself for a moment, she used the word “shitty”. Mayor and Council were aghast, my friend reports, as the electeds she was addressing experienced an onset of the vapours not seen since Gone With the Wind’s Scarlett O’Hara’s feinting (the correct spelling) spells, my friend ever-so-gently chastised by the Mayor.
My friend could live with that. What she couldn’t live with is that midway through her address to Mayor and Council … she cried, her voice still one of authority, but catching, she finding herself perhaps in need of oxygen.
My friend wrote to me …

When they told me I could go on in a second round, I said no. I told them this was hard enough, I would finish then would just go outside and have a good old cry. Then, I stood at the back of the room and was seen wiping a tear from my eye. Then, I left the chamber, came back loaded for bear. Not an insincere act in that performance. I DID cry. That was my response. I just refuse to apologize for it.

I am so sorry for men (and the women who emulate them), who think there is something wrong with crying. I find it one of the most liberating of the physical autonomic responses.

VanRamblings responded as follows …

In my time sitting as a member of Vancouver’s Board of Variance, when each of the 30 appellant individuals or groups Board Chair Terry Martin, and my fellow Board members Quincey Kirschner, Jan Pierce and Bruce Chown on whose presentations of appeal we adjudicated — on issues of critical, life-changing import — not once, in hundreds of appeals, no matter how stoic the presenters, not once did an appellant get through their five-minute presentation without crying, wholly unexpectedly to them, but not for those of us who sat on the Board.

Thirty seconds or a minute in, you could see and feel the presenter’s demeanour change, an utter surprise to them, their voice catching, a look of roiling pain on their face, and then the first tear, and before they even realized it, they were crying, sometimes inconsolably, at times the meeting drawing to a halt, a recess necessary before proceedings could continue. Humanity and life, human existence laid bare in a large committee room with a long polished oak table, five members of the Board of Variance, the male members in suits and ties, resplendent in our freshly laundered and ironed white shirts, the women dressed in casual but elegant business attire, but these were not your regular and expected meetings of an august, quasi-judicial body of civic governance … this was spiritual transcendence writ large on the human tableaux we call life. Crying, you say. Good for you. Serves only to prove that you are human … but you knew that already.

Update: My friend writes to say that New Westminster Mayor and Council rejected the development application as proposed.
And so, today’s column draws to a close.

Later today, VanRamblings will publish our interview with former Vancouver City Councillor Tim Louis, on the Thursday evening première of The Rankin File: Legacy of a Radical — a world début for Teresa Alfred’s warts and all biography of Harry Rankin, one of the most impactful men ever in the governance of our city, a champion always for the working man and woman, the wage labourers whose concerns had so long been ignored by generations of right-of-centre civic government in Vancouver, dominated for generations by the Vancouver Non-Partisan Association.