“In my five years (working for the city, as the City of Vancouver’s senior administrator) this would certainly be unprecedented to have this volume [of lawsuits] in this short period of time.”
Vancouver City Manager, Dr. Penny Ballem

As CityHallWatch observers have written, the Heather Place rezoning …

… calls for three times the height and density, halves the parking requirements, and reduces the number of affordable housing units from the present 86 units to 52 units. The new Heather Place project would provide 178 units at full market rental rate; the rezoning would also waive approximately $2.5 million in Development Cost Levy fees.

Only Green Party of Vancouver Councillor Adriane Carr voted against the rezoning, noting the loss of affordability (only 22% of units will be subsidized, as opposed to the current 30%), and the much higher market rents that will be charged (e.g. a projected $1968 for a 2-bedroom vs $900 currently being charged for the same Heather Place unit, more than double the current rental rate, tantamount to constructive eviction for tenants).
In addition, Ms. Carr took issue with the proposed 94-foot (28.7meter) height of the building on the northern lot, noting that it fails to conform to the adjacent neighbourhood; questions she asked on the impacts on existing services (given the greater number of residents to be housed in the massive 278-unit rezoned complex) were not answered by city officials — neither were questions pertaining to the costs of the chosen construction form (which is to say, concrete vs. the current wood frame).
Meanwhile, there are 11 other community-based legal actions and injunctions launched against the City of Vancouver and Vision Vancouver members of City Council that have either been resolved, or await adjudication in the Supreme Court of British Columbia.

1. On May 21, 2014, the False Creek Resident’s Association filed for judicial review by the Supreme Court of the city’s decisions to grant back-to-back temporary development permits to Concord Pacific for the operation of their sales centre on land zoned for park and recreation. The court petition challenges the city’s ability to allow a property designated for parks to be used for commercial purposes.

2. The Community Association of New Yaletown filed a legal petition at BC Supreme Court to prevent the development, on the downtown city block containing Emery Barnes Park, at Davie and Seymour, of what could become the densest residential building in Vancouver.

3. The Casa Mia rezoning court action. As the Southlands Community website states, “The Casa Mia Heritage Estate, located at 1920 SW Marine Drive, is threatened with precedent-setting rezoning.”

The Southlands community is not opposed to the use of the Casa Mia heritage site for the purposes of a small scale care facility for seniors. Rather the concern arises respecting the proposed large-scale, multi-level development that would encompass a hospital-like, 62 bed seniors care facility that residents believe would detrimentally impact, and significantly change the character of, the surrounding neighbourhood. Residents believe, as well, that the net effect of the proposed construction would serve to “warehouse” seniors, an approach to seniors care that is not only inhumane, but in direct contravention to the policy adopted by Vancouver City Hall’s very own Seniors Advisory Committee. More information may be found here.

4. Manipulation of protected view cones. A notice of civil claim was filed by the Residents Association Mount Pleasant in B.C. Supreme Court on March 4 alleging that the city — without Council debate, public notice, or motion of Council to amend the applicable zoning and development bylaw — significantly narrowed “view cones” that are legally protected. Details may be found in this Straight story.

5. An alleged conflict of interest in the building lease to social media company HootSuite, this suit launched against the City of Vancouver, including Mayor Gregor Robertson. Background to the suit may be found in this Valentine’s Day Vancouver Courier Bob Mackin story.

6. Short Term Incentives for Rental (STIR) and Rental 100, a petition filed by West End Neighbours, that has now been resolved (not in favour of the plaintiff). The legal action sought to quash bylaws that override existing zoning guidelines, violate the Vancouver Charter, and which it was alleged provided excessive incentives to developers.

7. The Hadden Park, 12-foot wide asphalt bike path, since resolved in favour of the plaintiff — there will be no bike path constructed through Hadden Park, nor through the adjacent Kitsilano Beach park. Extensive VanRamblings coverage of the issue may be found here.

8. Community Centre Associations suit against the Park Board and the City of Vancouver, some insight into which may be found here. In the coming days, VanRamblings will provide more extensive coverage of this issue, and an update as to where the parties are, at present, in the long-running, and not soon to be resolved, dispute.

9. Vancouver Not Vegas court challenge to PavCo and Paragon BC Place Casino Plan. Just click on the link above for details.

10. Alleged violation of Canadian Charter of Rights. City worker Milan Kljajic has taken the City of Vancouver to the Human Rights Tribunal, alleging that City of Vancouver managers violated the Charter of Rights by using the city’s code of conduct to muzzle a worker who stepped into a fight for control of the city’s community centres. Mr. Kljajic’s action hopes to reveal that some provisions of the City’s Code of Conduct are unconstitutional. More details on this legal action may be found in the September 29, 2013 Province newspaper story.

11. Alleged conflict of interest pertaining to the Oakridge Centre development. Cedar Party founder Glen Chernen, and nine others, filed a March 7th petition in B.C. Supreme Court asking that a judge disqualify Mayor Gregor Robertson, and his caucus, for failing to disclose a direct or indirect pecuniary conflict of interest. Details of the suit may be found in this Bob Mackin Vancouver Courier story.

As this editorial in The Province states, “Hey, Vision, city hall lawsuit
s are not a sign of happy citizens.” And so it has been written, and recorded.

A couple of days ago, Coalition of Progressive Electors (COPE) External Chair Tim Louis weighed in on the potential for a COPE-Green Party of Vancouver coalition going into the November 15th civic election.

“For people that are progressive, there is a very clear, very highly organized alternative, and that is COPE and the Vancouver Green Party,” Louis told Straight reporter Travis Lupick. “That (would) not (be) a formal alliance, but … progressive parties putting the best interests of this city ahead of the best interests of their own parties.”

At the time we read Louis’ statement, we thought he must be dreaming in technicolor. Adriane Carr, the sole Green Party of Vancouver Councillor on Vancouver City Council, responded to Louis’ invitation, stating …

“The Greens really span the political spectrum. You can’t peg us down as left or right. We really are ahead of that whole old spectrum. We draw support from a wide range of people, which is why in the last election, the Green Party of Vancouver made a decision to not have an alliance with any other party, to stand as a strong, independent choice for Vancouverites, no matter what other choices they might make.”

Although it pains us to say so, we partially agree with (former?) COPE member, Nicholas Ellan, who commented in the Straight, writing …

Carr is right. In 2011 she didn’t win by being the most popular left-wing politician, she won by being the most credible protest vote, receiving significant support from NPA and Vision voters which allowed her to beat Ellen Woodsworth for the 10th spot.

In 2014, she won’t be re-elected by siding with fringe parties, but rather by continuing to build on her record of credible opposition, open politics, and strong on-the-ground campaigning. She will likely have to beat an NPA candidate for 10th spot this time – no small feat. But if the right is split enough, the NPA incoherent enough, and the pipeline opposition strong enough, then it’s certainly possible that she’ll be returned to office.

At any rate, the whole issue of a COPE-Green Party of Vancouver coalition / ‘co-operative agreement’ is moot.
Last evening, in a special general meeting, Green Party of Vancouver members voted unanimously against participating in a coalition or electoral alliance with any other civic party. As Ms. Carr told VanRamblings, at last evening’s Green Party of Vancouver campaign kick-off event …

“Of course, Green Party of Vancouver members of Council would work together with other elected members of Council in the best interests of the citizens of Vancouver, but as the membership of the party clearly stated earlier this evening, there will be no formal alliance with any other civic party seeking office in the 2014 Vancouver general election.

Another 2014 civic election rumour / COPE wishful thinking put to rest.

Earlier today, VanRamblings met with deposed NPA Vancouver Board of Directors member, Ken Charko. Reasonably, we thought that Mr. Charko might wish to wrap his hands around our throat — we have been kind of mean to him in print, after all, these past couple of days — but he proved as genial and forthcoming as we’ve always found him to be.

“I’m still trying to come to terms with my removal from the NPA’s Board of Directors,” Charko told VanRamblings. “I’m not exactly sure what led to the decision taken by the Board. Fortunately, a great many people have reached out to me to offer support for the work I’d undertaken with the NPA these past couple of years, and my commitment to openness and transparency while sitting as an NPA Board member.”

“On other matters you raised in your column: There was reference made respecting my involvement in releasing to the media confidential information pertaining to NPA Board internal decision-making. I want to assure you, and your readers, that was not ever the case. Further, I want you to know that I have not had, nor will I have, any involvement with Vancouver First as a civic electoral party.

Well, there you go. Make of the statements above what you will — if nothing else, the machinations involved in Mr. Charko’s removal from the NPA’s BoD speaks volumes to the bloody sanguininity with which political parties approach the prospect of undertaking campaigns for office.

Finally, in today’s post covering Vancouver’s civic electoral scene …

Always a salutary event, COPE’s Summer Solstice BBQ provides a ready opportunity to get together with a welcoming and friendly group of civic-minded folks who possess a deep caring and commitment to the livability of our city. Low-income tickets are $5, regular tickets only $20 (although, for those who can afford it, a greater sum is always very much appreciated).
VanRamblings will be present at Saturday’s COPE BBQ, as we were for last evening’s welcoming and wonderfully enlightening (not to mention, friendly and inviting) Green Party of Vancouver campaign kick-off, and as we will be for (almost) all upcoming informal civic electoral campaign events that will occur over the summer months — always a great time to be had by all.

New Voices, One Vision slate: Sammie Jo Rumbaua, Coree Tull, Trish Kelly, Naveen Girn

The fix is in: awhile back VanRamblings received the following information from one of our regular correspondents, offering insider insight into the — tried and true, par for the course — selection process for Vision Vancouver Park Board candidates to fill out the slate for this November’s civic election …

Heard through the grapevine that the Vision backroom has decided that the four candidates for Park Board will be Trish Kelly, Sammie Jo Rumbaua, Coree Tull, and Naveen Girn. How exactly this squares with their election by the membership I’m not sure.

Some of COPE’s supporters were approached by both successful and unsuccessful candidates to sign up as members to vote and told various COPE people about it.

If this “gang of four” is true, then that means no Brent Granby and no Catherine Evans. No Katherine Day, Mark Mitchell, or Graham Anderson either. The latter two are bikes & gardens respectively. Granby also espouses bikes.

So … Vision is foregoing their environmental keeners and going for representation from visible minorities (I understand “racialized” is the current term) with Naveen and Sammie Jo, and the “L” in LGBTQ with Trish? And youth with Coree? Hmmm … will be interesting to find out if the rumour is true, but the person who told me seemed pretty sure.

VanRamblings has tweeted out the information above — denied by Vision Vancouver Executive Director, Stepan Vdovine — hoping to open the nomination process, somewhat, and provide a level playing field for those candidates not among the “chosen few” New Voices, One Vision slate.
Thursday morning, a kink was thrown into the nominating process when Hollyhock Board Chair, and Vision Vancouver supremo, Joel Solomon, endorsed five Park Board candidates for the four vacant positions on Vision’s Park Board slate, Brent Granby and Graham Anderson receiving his favour, and Filipina Sammie Jo Rumbaua left to hang out to dry.
According to a story published in The Straight last evening, more than 800 Vision members showed up at the advance polls, yesterday, for park and school board nominations. Results from the nomination process will be announced after 8pm, this Sunday, June 22nd, at the Waterfall Building, at 1540 West 2nd Avenue, near the entrance to Granville Island.

Housekeeping: Ken Charko Dumped from NPA Board of Directors
For the second time in 19 months, maverick NPA member Ken Charko has found himself “removed” from the Non-Partisan Association Board of Directors.
There’s been bad blood between Charko and the NPA for some time now — last summer, at the NPA’s AGM, the NPA’s Board of Directors brought a motion forward that would have stripped Charko of his membership in the party. The motion was narrowly defeated, with the support of a ragtag group of Jesse Johl and Charko acolytes and hangers on who’d turned out at the NPA AGM specifically to defeat the motion.
In respect of Charko’s recent expulsion, which was moved and voted on Wednesday, June 17th, a statement on the civic party’s website reads:

The decision to remove Charko was deemed necessary given his decision to knowingly, purposefully, and repeatedly violate the confidentiality that he and the entire NPA Board agreed to respect and uphold as part of their duty as directors.

Of course, there’s a great deal more to the story than may be gleaned from the otherwise reasoned, if enigmatic, statement above.
For some time now, the movers and shakers in the NPA have believed Ken Charko to be a quisling, an individual who has set about to not only provide aid and comfort to the “enemy” (civic opposition parties), but someone who has set a course to actively undermine the party’s chances for power this November, by consistently acting as a “confidential informant” to members of the fourth (bloggers) and fifth (mainstream media) estates.
In addition to all of the above, various reports have emerged in the community over the past year that indicate Ken Charko was the major funder of the nascent right-wing municipal party, Vancouver First, and that working with Jesse Johl — and anticipating that he’d likely be removed from the NPA once again — Charko and Johl would mount a bid for civic office this autumn, with Vancouver First as their newly chosen vehicle.
With all the controversy surrounding Jesse Johl, in his role as President of the Riley Park-Hillcrest Community Centre Association, Johl has emerged as a disgraced and spent force. Charko — who managed 45,372 votes in the 2011 Vancouver civic election, coming in 14th, just 3276 votes behind the last Councillor to be elected — would like nothing better than to emerge as Vancouver’s oleaginous answer to Rob Ford (minus the drugs, of course).
Ain’t gonna happen, though, despite The Straight’s ringing endorsement.

The Little Mountain Housing Development Story. A documentary project by David Vaisbord

Vancouver-based independent filmmaker and documentarian David Vaisbord has created a compelling crowdfunding campaign on indiegogo, a personal film project to document the story of, as CityHallWatch wrote last year …

The premature destruction of the Little Mountain social housing complex in Vancouver and the ongoing saga about the community and the site’s fate … offshore investors, egos, political influence and spin, bureaucratic bungling, mainstream media blindspots and incompetence, and more, are some of the factors determining the flow of the saga of the Little Mountain housing development.

Riley Park community activist Ned Jacobs weighed in recently, writing …

“Since 2009, when all but four of the 224 homes at Little Mountain Housing were demolished, the 15-acre site, which housed a well-functioning community in 2007, has sat fenced off and empty except for a scattering of trees. A single rowhouse building remains because several of the tenants courageously refused to be displaced by BC Housing (BCH).

Supportive housing is a core element of our social safety net. Former NDP MLA David Chudnovsky has pointed out that we don’t sell off our parks to cover social assistance and disability cheques; why then would we sell our social housing sites to fund supportive housing? It would make much more sense to fund supportive housing through general revenue, and redevelop Little Mountain and other appropriate social housing sites as rentals and cooperatives to house a broad range of incomes — and especially “first responders” and other essential service workers that have been frozen out of the Vancouver market.

For the City to allow the project to proceed without the crucial amenities would be irresponsible and a slap in the face to the entire community, as well, as would permitting greater height or density than set out in the Little Mountain Policy Statement (LMPS).

David Vaisbord’s powerful, revealing documentation of nearly five years of the Little Mountain saga has already helped move the tide of events in a positive direction. A feature-length documentary telling this important story through the spoken words and images of the people and the place could contribute to achieving a far happier outcome.