SPECIAL NOTE: Since posting this article some 15 minutes ago, our blog has been bombarded with traffic. If audio files fail to work, click to reload the page and try again. All files have been tested many times and are functioning. The volume of traffic in 15 minutes is incredible.
During the Township of Langley budget process Councillor Jordan Bateman proposed a motion that would instruct staff to place the discretionary advertising on the "Township Page" out for tender. While some advertising (such as Council and other municipal meetings) are required by law, others advertising such as a community service message or notice of the Mayor's Forum is not mandated by law. Bateman's intention was to get a competitive quote and run the ads in one paper instead of the current three. The motion was defeated at that time, as some members of Council were absent and Cllrs. Long and Kositsky opposed the motion and wanted staff to compile a complete communications plan or strategy.
At a subsequent Special Meeting of Township Council held on March 15, 2010, Cllr. Bateman was absent due to the birth of his child and Cllr. Fox proposed a motion to reduce the Township Page advertising budget by $100,000. With Cllr. Kim Richter now present, the Fox motion was seconded by Richter.
You Can Hear That Audio Here:
During the course of Council discussion, Cllrs. Long and Kositsky put forth another amendment to send the whole matter back to staff (a referral motion). These two love to send stuff back to staff so decisions can be postponed. That referral motion was defeated.
Something Old - Nothing New
During the debate on the referral motion, Cllr. Richter brought up the ad size for the Mayor's Forum. At that time (and since February, 2009), the Mayor's ad has been a pricey quarter-page and included a large 10 year old photo of Mayor Green. You know, this corny one used during the campaign:
The Bottom Line - The KickerYou Can Hear That Audio Here:
As you heard in that clip, Mayor Green said that he did not design the ads nor decide how BIG they are.
Listen Specifically to What Mayor Green Said Here:
The Lies EXPOSED
So, if Mayor Green did not have say into the design of the Mayor's Forum ads, then why did he instruct staff to use that old picture? A picture took up considerable space in these ads. All at taxpayer expense! Here's what he said...funny eh?
But as the Freedom of Information Request discovered, Mayor Rick Green did in fact have a say not only in the design of the Mayor's Forum ad, but also in the size. This ad as seen in this proof would have been about the size of a Council meeting notice. But as you can see from this Langley Times (you know, that "buddy" paper) proof below, Mayor Green wrote a note to staff.
What, can't read these notes? Here's a close-up of that section for you:
Mayor Green writes on this proof, "LARGER" (initial "R" for Rick) authorizing this larger ad. Through clarification of our FoI request we were told that a Township staffer spoke with the mayor and then the staffer wrote, "It will cost more." - But wait for it.... after that discussion with Mayor Green, the staff member records Mayor Green's response by writing in quotes what the mayor said, "The cost of doing business" and the date Feb 17 09.
Wow - so not only did Mayor Rick Green fail to deliver any ZERO tax increases, but all that rhetoric about his Finance Committee, doing things differently and reducing costs was just that, RHETORIC! Despite the mayor knowing this little 14 month venture in living large advertising would be costly for us taxpayers, Green authorized a very large quarter-page ad with his equally-large 10 year old photo on it.
This is Rick Green's "cost of doing business" ... On our backs and without any regard to the budget that for two years now he has failed to vote for. Mayor Green ordered off the menu with this expensive advertising in 3 newspapers and failed to pay the bills by voting for the 2009 and 2010 budgets.
Keep in mind that with a whole two years before the next election, Mayor Rick Green has already announced his re-election intentions a few weeks ago in the newspapers. Do you suppose this expensive Mayor's Drop-In Forum 14 Month advertising campaign (with ads 100 times larger than any ad for very important Council Meetings) was just free re-election politicking for candidate Rick Green? So really this campaign began in February of 2009, just after his inauguration. Isn't that what some Councillors said at the time? And several accused those councillors of picking on the mayor, imagine that? They well realize that a short leash must be kept here.
We do hope that all Council members will question this massive advertising budget and the inconsistencies of facts. Perhaps they could explore some financial loss recovery from Mayor Green's Re-election Committee?
It's a crying shame that Cllr. Kim Richter (who had posed a clear and direct question to the mayor), received just an intelligence-insulting slap from the mayor. Shame, shame Mayor Green!
Listen Specifically to What Mayor Green Said Here:
The Lies EXPOSED
So, if Mayor Green did not have say into the design of the Mayor's Forum ads, then why did he instruct staff to use that old picture? A picture took up considerable space in these ads. All at taxpayer expense! Here's what he said...funny eh?
But as the Freedom of Information Request discovered, Mayor Rick Green did in fact have a say not only in the design of the Mayor's Forum ad, but also in the size. This ad as seen in this proof would have been about the size of a Council meeting notice. But as you can see from this Langley Times (you know, that "buddy" paper) proof below, Mayor Green wrote a note to staff.
What, can't read these notes? Here's a close-up of that section for you:
Mayor Green writes on this proof, "LARGER" (initial "R" for Rick) authorizing this larger ad. Through clarification of our FoI request we were told that a Township staffer spoke with the mayor and then the staffer wrote, "It will cost more." - But wait for it.... after that discussion with Mayor Green, the staff member records Mayor Green's response by writing in quotes what the mayor said, "The cost of doing business" and the date Feb 17 09.
Wow - so not only did Mayor Rick Green fail to deliver any ZERO tax increases, but all that rhetoric about his Finance Committee, doing things differently and reducing costs was just that, RHETORIC! Despite the mayor knowing this little 14 month venture in living large advertising would be costly for us taxpayers, Green authorized a very large quarter-page ad with his equally-large 10 year old photo on it.
This is Rick Green's "cost of doing business" ... On our backs and without any regard to the budget that for two years now he has failed to vote for. Mayor Green ordered off the menu with this expensive advertising in 3 newspapers and failed to pay the bills by voting for the 2009 and 2010 budgets.
Keep in mind that with a whole two years before the next election, Mayor Rick Green has already announced his re-election intentions a few weeks ago in the newspapers. Do you suppose this expensive Mayor's Drop-In Forum 14 Month advertising campaign (with ads 100 times larger than any ad for very important Council Meetings) was just free re-election politicking for candidate Rick Green? So really this campaign began in February of 2009, just after his inauguration. Isn't that what some Councillors said at the time? And several accused those councillors of picking on the mayor, imagine that? They well realize that a short leash must be kept here.
We do hope that all Council members will question this massive advertising budget and the inconsistencies of facts. Perhaps they could explore some financial loss recovery from Mayor Green's Re-election Committee?
It's a crying shame that Cllr. Kim Richter (who had posed a clear and direct question to the mayor), received just an intelligence-insulting slap from the mayor. Shame, shame Mayor Green!
8 comments:
I am sure this is not the only lie and the wy you folks do business I am sure you will uncover many more. He needs to be impeached and severley punished, this is a breech of his 'Oath of Office' and we need him gone.
One pissed off resident.
HOW CAN COUNCIL now TRUST this MAYOR...... OUR mayor? A councillor asked a simple question on behalf of Council (& for every constituent) to which Mayor Green 'verbally DENIES any involvement' (regarding 'HIS AD' of the 'Mayor's forum')?? So the question is AGAIN, `How can Council NOW trust ANYTHING this mayor states, how can any constituent NOW trust Rick Green, the present mayor?`
Bully dufus-Green thinks the big-AD-dollar wins the day. For every lie, it takes two; well this has been fun, but the fun is over, BIG DUFUS. For every lie, it takes at least two to cover it. Let`s see how YOU do tomorrow ...........
First, I have just discovered this blog and feel it is a wonderful opportunity to get the message out that this Mayor needs a recall!
Yes, I believe that his ads are a blatant waste of taxpayer money!
Furthermore, I attended the afternoon session of the Special Council meeting on Monday April 26th. Under discussion was the recommendation by staff (sure would love to know who those 'staff' are because they certainly are not familiar with the subject discussed!) that the 64th Avenue route be chosed for the proposed East Langley water line. First and foremost that must be addressed here is that the Township DO NOT HAVE THE MONEY to build this line! That was quite evident by their numbers yesterday.
Second, it was quite apparent judging by the members of the audience (the consultants for Lorad Enterprises who did not have any reason to be there until the evening session when they were on the agenda) that there are people behind the scenes trying to push through the 64th Avenue route in order for Lorad (Gar Campbell) to develop his 65-home subdivision on the old Tuscan Farm Gardens property. The consultants argue that land in the ALR has a one-acre minimum - and that the 65 homes on 80 acres would be just fine. Hello??? They are NOT wanting to put the 65 homes on 80 acres, but in two clusters on the lower 32 acres. This would have such a detrimental effect on the Hopington Aquifer and the Coghlan Creek that runs through the property. The devastation would be immeasurable. Who is it at the TOL staff or council that is trying to get this pushed through?? After several people spoke about the controversial route and the inept way that TOL staff have handled this whole situation, Councillor Richter recommended that a 500-person telephone survey be conducted in order to get a better cross-section of opinion. That is a GREAT idea as long as the people conducting the survey get the RIGHT information! At the informational meetings and subsequent survey that was done in fall of last year, it was suggested that the Fraser Highway route for the pipeline would be best for all those on the Hopington - HOWEVER, the TOL staff neglected to point out that that route would only go east to 248 St and then north on 248 st to 56 Ave - directly through the Hopington again!!! So what is the point??? Anyway - to make a long story short, Councillor Jordan Bateman convinced the rest of council to reject Councillor Richter's proposal!! What happened to democracy?? Why does Councillor Bateman get to dictate whether or not the people of the Salmon River uplands can have a voice in what happens to their future?? Councillor Bateman is obviously in favor of putting the water through 64th Avenue or 52nd Avenue. Doesn't one wonder if he has friends who want to develop in that area?? Isn't it a coincidence that Mayor Green lives in the same area??
The end result was that the decision has been deferred until probably June until more information can be gathered. The BEST proposal came when the suggestion of running the line along Fraser Highway directly to Aldergrove, bypassing the Hopington altogether. Once you are looking at projects over $40 million, any reasonable person is going to realize that a few extra million don't matter at that point! And where are they going to get the money anyway??
Very very disappointed in this mayor and Councillor Bateman.
EDITOR'S NOTE:
LORAD was on the afternoon agenda. Because time was almost over, Council voted to carry some afternoon items over to the evening meeting. This is why the evening meeting was adjourned and those afternoon items were carried forward. Just a point of clarification for accuracy sake.
I just found your website through the Langley Advance story. I cannot believe what is going on with this Mayor Green character. Why won't he tell the truth?
One of your writers call him Tricky Ricky. Right on!
Just check the last adverdisement for the mayor's forum on April 24.
One local paper was delivered late on the 23rd another mid day on the 24th. "Certainly provides an opportunitry to attend" what a waste of advertising $$$
I too attended this meeting due to concerns about us spending an extra 5 million to put the water line through on 64th Avenue. I beg to differ with one comment on here that says extra millions are not big deal! What is he or she smoking? It is a big deal. After all we will be paying for it eventually. The fact is they have the most direct, cheapest, easiest to construct route in the 52 Avenue route. It is central to all the areas of concern up in the Hopington Aquifer. There is no guarentee that the people along that route would automatically have access to that water supply at this time anyway but if one is planning for future it makes sense to centralize any main water line feed so that if it becomes necessary then can then run their feeder lines off of it with less cost again. To put it far to the north or to go to the huge expense of taking down a major highway route with all the headaches that entails makes no sense. They have to go up to connect anyway as the line they need to connect to Gloucester is up on 56th Avenue! Please everyone look up the facts and get them straight before you make snap decisions. Aldergrove needs the water line sooner than later so get it done the cheapest, fastest, most direct route way now!
Post a Comment