"With the arrival of Mayor Rick Green, Councillor Kim Richter now has one member on council who sees at least some things her way. Both are outspoken in opposition to Kurt Alberts, who, time will tell, was one of the best mayors the Township has had."LR Editor - That's right Mr. Irwin, because these two are very much birds of a feather and they ran a slate together. But this slate, with constant self-professions of immense business accumen have yet to greatly detail what they will do differently than that of former Mayor Kurt Alberts and his council.
"Yet extensive work over the past four years by the previous council has secured funding of some $51 million from various partners including Ottawa, for a rail-overpass solution to the safety concerns (particularly for emergency vehicles) at the Mufford/Glover intersection."LR Editor - Right again Mr. Irwin. For the sake of some staunch Rick Green supporters this Township may lose a whole lot of money and this very important infrastructure. All in the name of helping some good old friends of Mayor Rick Green. The good mayor pointed his finger at former Mayor Alberts and a dynamic council team. Accusing them of doing something that he (Green) and Richter did themselves, and that was to run a slate. Alberts published no newspaper ads in 2008 that indicated he had any slate. He did run ordinary people picture ads of those that supported him. It was Richter's website that encouraged people to "plum the ballot" and then provided a listing of the slate on election day.
"That overpass, and its funding, could be in jeopardy since Green and some of his supporters are questioning the route through the ALR lands of Milner. However, the majority on council, those Green refers to in his campaign literature as “the silent slate” (a nod to Richter’s website) and Richter chides on her website as the “good old boys,” were all returned in the election. These councillors would dispute that they comprise a slate. And when you consider that one of them, Grant Ward, originally ran (unsuccessfully) on the same slate as Richter, the Langley Citizen’s Coalition, and another, Jordan Bateman, also first ran unsuccessfully, on the Coalition’s arch-foe and raison d’etre, the Langley Leadership Team, and Mel Kositsky served with aplomb and dignity as an independent throughout the Langley Leadership era, the “silent slate” label is at best spurious."
"Green, in his campaign, adopted many issues championed by Richter, most notably property tax increases, increases primarily necessitated to cover increasing wages (wages are 61 per cent of the operating budget) and new, full-time fire fighting staff, which Richter also championed, and which Green has promised to continue to implement. As one correspondent to Richter’s own website noted, that’s like ordering from the menu, and refusing to pay the bill. Richter and Green also take issue with airport lease rates, though Richter voted against lease hikes in 2001."LR Editor - We totalled 87% of the budget for wages based on the Council Priorities meeting notes and collective agreements. Councillor Richter has ordered from the TOL menu many times before without paying the bill so to speak.
You will recall during the 2008 debates Richter said (over and over again), "Ribbon-cutting ceremonies cost the taxpayers money". But the good councillor went on to attend many ribbon cuttings, (at least long enough to get up front and be part of the photo op). Take Jackman Park in Aldergrove as a perfect example. Once the photographer snapped the picture, Councillor Richter was seen making a quick V-line to her chariot. No doubt the permanent smile will be front and centre for the Langley Events Centre ribbon-cutting.
"However, as Richter so plaintively pointed out in her inaugural speech, no one on council should be ostracized, though reliable sources say Richter herself has not spoken to some council members, including her one-time Citizens Coalition running mate, Ward, for several years, and her incessant barrage of website vitriol against the “good old boys” may have fostered more enmity than amity."LR Editor - We also have it on very good sources that the Green side of the Green-Richter not-so-silent slate is also not on speaking terms with Councillor Grant Ward, and communication with other council members and some staff are strained at best with Mayor Green at his making. How does one be accountable to the taxpayers when this slate is busy holding grudges against other council members and even some of the electorate that opposed them? This is extremly childish and is certain not to go unoticed by the electorate, and The Langley Record will make certain of that.
We find it very interesting that we had been doing our research for days to confirm facts for our Saturday post and had no knowledge of Al Irwin's article and that it would be published the same day. It just goes to show you that this slate is VERY obvious to those who watch and listen. We can't speak more highly of Al Irwin's knowledgeable and astute observations. The man certainly has brains and guts and is a fine journalist in our community. Great work Mr. Irwin!
12 comments:
"This was obviously a silent slate until the web post, but as we say, actions were and are very clear"Oohhh, a silent slate!So when Coleman endorsed candidates in the last election I guess that was a slate as well.Incidentally, just as an aside, why is a slate bad?I presume the "professional journalist" will be identified with his post.Otherwise it has no credibility. Horny Toad
LR Editor Comments: When Coleman and Polak endorsed some candidates they were simply saying these are people that we feel have some integrity. Also, those candidates asked the MLA's for endorsements. I don't believe that Coleman or Polak will go to those Trustees for anything now that the election is over, do you? But with Richter and Green this is a very different picture, especially with the hidden agendas.
Several of us at The Langley Record have no problem with slates and see that it could be a good tool for collaboration. But it seems that the majority of Langley voters seem to reject slates. Incidentally, it was Councillor Richter and her blog that made a big deal of the "Good Old Boys" and the "Silent Slate". But what we are trying to communicate here is that you shouldn't attack one group for a list of endorsed candidates and then on election day post your slate. All this after she stated clearly in the numerous debates that she was the taxpayer's independent voice at the council table and she would only represent their interests.
The article identifies Al Irwin as that professional journalist. Forgive us if that point was not made clear.
We need to thank Green and Richter. They have awoken the electorate.
By attacking all those groups that add value to the community, they will pay for it at election time.
We will not forget!!!!!!!!!
Good point and if Green and Richter had some wise counsel they could have taken a different approach and avoided all this. But whomever is giving them advice is really off base.
For example, Green used the Mayor's Report to turn the barrel of his gun on the remainder of council with regards to the LEC. It wasn't information being brought for discussion, it was more like him trying to say, "Ah huh, I gotcha!" If he was more diplomatic and less of a bull in a china shop he could have addressed the issues in a civil manner and won praise for his approach. But with not talking to some councillors and holding grudges, he just comes off as mean-spirited and disrespectful.
Like Kurt Alberts or hate him, Kurt allowed for discussion and didn't turn microphones off on people. He genuinely listened and respected your point of view. This is diplomacy and this is what the job of mayor requires. If Green continues to be a bull then it will be clear that he is not mayor material.
Richter is generally calm but her hidden agendas and tactics always backfire on her. We thought she might change her approach with her inaugural speech about everyone on council having various needed skills and such. But alas it was just coddling to a large audience. Too bad Kim. We did have hope for a short time.
"For example, Green used the Mayor's Report to turn the barrel of his gun on the remainder of council with regards to the LEC. It wasn't information being brought for discussion, it was more like him trying to say, "Ah huh, I gotcha!" If he was more diplomatic and less of a bull in a china shop he could have addressed the issues in a civil manner and won praise for his approach. But with not talking to some councillors and holding grudges, he just comes off as mean-spirited and disrespectful."
From my perspective, as a taxpayer of the TOL,I think it was very appropriate for the mayor to show what was happening and who was responsible. Too many times in government there is too much secrecy. I presume had Alberts continued on to be mayor we might never have known about the "mickey mouse" way the LEC has been handled.
I look at it more like Green said -this is what I've been telling everyone for the past year and here is the proof.
As for this statement "If he was more diplomatic" I guess my response would be "you mean like Coun. Ward"
Horny Toad
No argument from us regarding open government Horny Toad. I guess we differ on the approach. But being a leader and taking the high road will command more respect than being a bull about it.
We have to also say that the whole issue of "secrecy" is a matter of perspective. The TOL has a website where all council reports are posted along with meeting agendas. How many people read those report and attend the meetings? We find many of the things people claim are secret have actually been discussed time and again in council. Things don't just "happen" in the TOL. There is a staff report or something that sparks action. In other words there is a paper trail and people need to find and read it.
The electorate has awoken and believe me, Green as a one term wonder and Richter not far behind 2011 will be interesting. They both won on the strength of each other and the rural vote (let's wait and see who their major funder sare eh!) - when the fine citizens of Walnut Grove wake up as does those in Willoughby and they realize how these two stiff them on services (e.g. recreation centre hours of operation and admission fees) and amenities (e.g. parks) that they paid for as DCC money, each and every time they speak, there tenure on council will be finite - thank you very much.
Seems to me that Richter has been a one term wonder for what-the past 3 elections. As for increased admission fees for the rec center, pool etc. although I haven't seem any evidence of that what is the matter with those that use it paying for it. Especially when many of those are not TOL residents(and don't pay TOL taxes). Langley city has their cash cow(casino) so why don't they build their own facilities instead of sponging off us. Perhaps there should be a separate price for TOL users and non-TOL users.
I have yet (in 20 years) had any of my family use those facilities but I'm not complaining, just saying that user pay seems far.
Horny Toad
We would also agree with you that there is nothing wrong with User Fees, as well as a Resident and Non-Resident rate. Actually in 2008 the TOL did a study and found that our recreation centre rates were higher than that of our neighbours and reduced the fees. Keep them on par with others and institute a Non-Resident rate for sure.
But Horny Toad, there may be a fight to this plan because Richter opposed higher lease rates for the Langley Airport and then attacked Kurt Alberts and others for what see saw as cheap leases. Now we are having to live with an approved plant to increase the lease rates over a few years thanks to Kim Richter.
As your family doesn't use the recreation centres, many of us are older and don't have kids in school. But we don't argue helping to pay for them. Some things are what we would term "required community services".
"there may be a fight to this plan because Richter opposed higher lease rates for the Langley Airport and then attacked Kurt Alberts and others for what see saw as cheap leases"
I wonder why this "obsession" with Richter?
Why should there be a fight just because "she" opposes something? And if she can convince other councillors to see it her way, well thats democracy.
She is only one of a number of councillors. So what if she opposed the Airport lease rates. And surely if she then attacked Alberts for low rates AFTER voting for low rates, well she deserves what the gets-re-election???.
On an aside I would like to see a listing of ALL the votes that the past council held.
All of this sudden attention on Richter(and Green) suggests an "agenda" to me.
I also don't have kids in school but don't think twice about school taxes.(other than they, like all taxes are too high)but I disagree that recreation centers are a "required" community service (in so far as they should be subsidized). And I totally oppose building an "olympic" size swimming pool(as opposed to a regualr swimming pool) for "one" potential olympian (as I recall). To me that is one of the areas where wastage of tax dollars occurs.
Horny Toad
I believe these guys started this blog by saying they would check things out and report on the background of things. In my opinion they are doing an excellent job. I voted for Kim Richter a couple of times and between what I see here and what she did a few weeks ago, she won't get my vote ever again. If you don't like what these guys are posting then just start your own blog and you can write cotton candy about your pals Rick Green and Kim Richter.
If people don't like the tax rate or having facilities nearby, they can always move and allow progress to happen. They are just bitching for the sake of bitching. Get a life!
Hey, waterboy, you are the one who voted for Richter, not once but twice. In view of your comments about Richter that wasn't too bright.
So its obvious you believe everything you read without question.
I prefer to ask questions.
Horny Toad
Someone posted a comment here that we approved but it disappeared in space. Basically this person wondered why we posted this about the Green-Richter slate and did not mention Kurt Alberts and his endorsements in the 2005 election.
LR EDITOR COMMENTS: You are missing the point here. Kurt Alberts made his intended endorsements very clear by publishing them in the local papers and posting signs around the Township. He did it in the open.
Rick Green and Kim Richter proclaimed their independence time and again during the campaign and at every debate in the Township. Someone asked her on her website if she was endorsing Rick Green and her "editor" refused a written response. Then on election day they posted the slate on their website and made sure they crossed out the names of people they despise. That's the difference.
Post a Comment