The news behind the news. Exploring the political issues, debates and voting records in the Township of Langley and sometimes beyond.

Saturday, January 31, 2009

Questions Raised About TOL Mayor's Standing Committees

As we have previously blogged, Township Council has serious questions about the need for more committees and commissions in the TOL. The latest Langley Times article covers this debate here. As you will see from the agenda we will post tomorrow, this matter does not appear on the council's agenda and we therefore assume that Mayor Green still has no Terms of Reference (ToR) for his proposal now that we are entering February already! One would think that as the mayor had this plan in mind throughout his campaign he would have already had a ready written ToR many, many months ago. This appears to be yet another item that was presented in the campaign and which Mayor Green had absolutely no detailed plan to implement it.

Most of council feel this is simply a duplication of the structure that already exists and with a proper work plan for the existing structure, the same could be acommplished at a significant cost reduction to taxpayers. Why is Mayor Green so insistent on these duplicate committees? Does he simply have more friends and insiders that he wishes to inject into the Township?

Its not often that we agree with Councillor Richter, but in this case her statements are very much echoed by her collegues on council. Counsellors Steve Ferguson and Mel Kositsky have also been very vocal on this subject. 

“Why do we need an economic development task force?” asked Councillor Kim Richter.

Richter suggested that the work plan of the existing Economic Development (select) Committee could be changed to accomplish what Green proposes for his new economic task force.

Green said that a task force would be more project focused, possibly looking at industrial space, and industrial/commercial/residential base, over a period of up to six to eight months, as opposed to the committee’s ongoing role.

The existing committees are established under a bylaw, and the mayor does not have the authority to suspend them, said Councillor Mel Kositsky.

These committees have however been asked to suspend any substantive work, said administrator Mark Bakken, while the complexities of the mayor’s proposals for standing committees are worked out.

Kositsky said he is concerned about the volunteer members of the community who currently serve or have replied to advertisements to serve on the committees."

Councillor Steve Ferguson keeps having to remind the rookie mayor that democracy must prevail and if you profess to be a campion of open and transparent government, then you shouldn't create various committees filled with friends and insiders and given secret mandates from the mayor. Coun. Ferguson is very good at these reminders because he makes his appeals in a very civil manner as a "student of democracy". Ferguson really is a student of democracy in his interactions with Township Council for sure. The rookie mayor could get some valuable lessons from Councillors Ferguson, Kositsky and others.


Kositsky said that volunteers “who have a life,” need to know what is happening with the committees, so they can plan ahead for meetings.

Green said he is not planning to change or “subvert” anything by creating an economic task force or safety policing committee, but he sees the select and standing committees as having two different purposes.

“Council always works better when we do it together,” said Councillor Steve Ferguson, who suggested a council workshop or retreat to find out more about Green’s vision, and for Green to get oriented to what council and the committees are doing or have done.


Wednesday, January 28, 2009

Township Set to Lose Golden Opportunity Under Mayor Green

With budget cuts in the Township of Langley set to impact all residents in order to maintain his campaign promise of a zero-based budget (no property tax increase for 3 years), is Mayor Green setting this Township up for long-term failure and deterioration?

The mayor's finance committee has been pouring over the budget for things that could be cut. All department directors have been asked to bring forth lean budgets that will allow various proposed projects to drop off the list. Even the Langley RCMP has dropped some new initiatives off the list of funded projects for 2009. Does the taxpayer understand that zero-based budgets in other communities have simply meant that various projects that should be tackled this year will simply be deferred in order for us to realize no property taxes? Do that understand that at a future date these projects will have to be accomplished to combat crumbling infrastructure?

Are all of these infrastructure project deferrals really wise in our Township as the federal government is announcing a massive availability of funds for municipalities who can contribute towards the projects?  This could be the single most important opportunity for our community to get the much-needed infrastructure that will serve ourt projected growth from 100,000 people to almost 200,000 over the next 10-15 years. We may never see a federal program anywhere near the size of this in our lifetime. 

Of course, Mayor Green could seek to borrow this money and put the TOL into debt to cover this project fund-matching, thereby creating a zero-based budget in theory only. Will we as a growing community reject the goose that lays the golden eggs or will we get goosed for going Green? 

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

HOT NEWS - Vancouver Watchdog Warns City

**********************************************************************************

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

A kind reader in the know provided these supporting documents explaining how leased lands are over-valued in the City of Vancouver's Property Endowment Fund. 

Document 1

Document 2

**********************************************************************************

UNDER WHO'S WATCH DID THIS OVER-VALUATION HAPPEN ?

Vancouver watchdog citizen Robert Renger is doing the same thing that The Langley Record is doing in warning taxpayers of the Township of Langley to approach with caution Mayor Rick Green's suggestions of a Property Endowment Fund fashioned after the City of Vancouver. 

In an article appearing in today's issue of Straight.com, Renger's letter to the City of Vancouver dated January 18, 2009 is published:

Renger's e-mail to the mayor, council, and the city manager: 

From: ROBERT RENGER
Date: Sunday, January 18, 2009 11:01 pm
Subject: Property Endowment Fund overvaluation
To: mayorandcouncil@vancouver.ca,penny.ballem@vancouver.ca
 
To the City Manager, Mayor and Council,  

I want to thank you for becoming transparent and forthright with the public (and especially the City's taxpayers) regarding Olympic Village issues. 

Hopefully you will now follow this same approach with respect to the value of the City’s Property Endowment Fund. I am certain that an independent evaluation would find that it is worth significantly less than the $2.7 billion claimed in the City’s Financial Statements. 

It seems clear to me that the value of the PEF has been systematically overstated for many years, by the way in which overvalued leased lands (including lands that the City has leased out for long prepaid terms) are included as PEF assets. There are details and examples in the attached documents which I wrote several years ago (and to which I received no substantive responses).  

On November 11, 2008, I sent this same material to Ken Bayne, your General Manager of Business Planning and Services, after I heard him on the radio saying “Vancouver's Property Endowment Fund is still worth two or two and a half billion dollars in real estate”. In my email I asked him the following question: 

"Can you tell me how much of the Fund’s $2.5 billion in land assets is land for which the City has sold prepaid leases, and whether or not you think that land’s value as a City asset has been overstated?" 

He hasn't answered or even acknowledged my email. 

I expect that at some point (even if City Hall tries to ignore the issue) it is going to become publicly evident that: 

(1) the City has been greatly overstating the value of PEF land assets, and that 

(2) its actual assets are mostly not very liquid. 

In the meantime, I am concerned that bad information leads to bad decisions. So I hope you will address this issue proactively, without delay. 

I would appreciate being informed of your intentions. 

sincerely, 
Robert Renger 

This article also states, "Renger has claimed that the city has "systematically overstated" the value of the Property Endowment Fund for many years by overvaluing leased lands. He believes that an independent evaluation would reveal this."

It will be interesting to learn if these allegations are correct, and just how long this overstating of value has gone on in the City of Vancouver. Also of interest to the taxpayers of the Township will be to see under which City of Vancouver Real Estate Manager(s) this occured, if the allegations are found to be true. Stay tuned folks!