It now appears that Mayor Green has performed another of his now famous flip-flops. See for yourself.
Mayor Rick Green's Inaugural Address INAUGURAL ADDRESS by Mayor William R. (Rick) Green Township of Langley - December 1, 2008
"The citizens have voted, it is now time to put that behind us, and get down to work for the benefit of the taxpayer, and I truly believe all of us at this table are committed to deliver just that."
"I want to make it very clear that we will continue to work closely with our senior levels of government. It is my intent to establish regular meetings with all three of our representatives Mr. Mark Warawa, our Federal MP, the Honourable Rich Coleman, MLA for Fort Langley-Aldergrove, and with the Honourable Mary Polak, MLA for Langley. These meetings will ensure that our lines of communication are open at all times."
"It has always been my belief that our relationship with our senior levels of government must be solid, open, and cooperative, however, it must also be stated that we will ensure the needs of Township citizens and their interests come first. That applies to quality of life, family, transportation, agriculture, environment, as well as health issues among others."
"You have our commitment that we will carry your wishes with us in our deliberations and discussions with the province, the federal government, and at the Region Board table. We will negotiate and fight on your behalf."
Langley Advance - Tuesday, January 6, 2008 Letter From Mayor Rick Green
"The failure of federal funding to materialize is significant to the Township taxpayer. While there is a significant record of communication between the Township and the federal government, I cannot find an official application for funding. One would have to agree, it would take more than a few letters to MPs and cabinet ministers to support an application for $5 million, even from the federal government."
So did Mayor Green meet with MP Warawa to "negotiate and fight on our behalf"? Councillor Jordan Bateman put up a good fight and also provided documentation to refute the MP. What about Green?
20 comments:
Its called selective fighting or also know as infighting.
"Rick Green promised to be there for us to fight on our behalf. That includes "intense farming" and going after the provincial government for the Right to Farm legislation, the federal government over heavy train traffic and money for the Langley Events Centre."
My goodness, Green has been the Mayor for over a month and he hasn't come up with all the things you said he promised. What is the world is he doing with all his time.
"Councillor Jordan Bateman put up a good fight and also provided documentation to refute the MP."
Umm, actually, what Bateman did was to fight like hell to CYA. Everything he posted confirmed to me that the previous mayor and council dropped the ball as far as funding from the feds is concerned. Jordan even went so far on his blog as to say that Warawa was quoted as having said that the TOL never asked for the money. In fact Warawa never said that(according to the newspaper report).What he did say was that the TOL never formally applied in the proper manner.
"So did Mayor Green meet with MP Warawa to "negotiate and fight on our behalf""
BTW, are you naive enough to think that a meeting with Warawa would magically produce the money or are you just trying to smear Green again?
Just wondering.
Horny Toad
Horny Toad: Green is mayor period and the length of time does not matter. He should have had his detailed plans ready to go on November 16, 2008 and he promised many times to be our advocate with other orders of government. Regardless of what Warawa does or doesn't do, Green should have been setting up the meetings instead of arguing past history with Bateman.
Also, we have to keep reminding people that KIM RICHTER was part of that council and therefore if anything was done wrong, where was this self-proclaimed watch-dog? Richter cannot divorce herself from this or any other past council actions.
Keep sticking up for your man because he is seriously dropping the ball time after time and the people have now noticed. Look at the letters to the local papers this week. The word is out and the coach will put him on the bench permanently and sooner than people think three years will pass.
"Green should have been setting up the meetings instead of arguing past history with Bateman."
And you know that he hasn't been doing this-how?
"Also, we have to keep reminding people that KIM RICHTER was part of that council and therefore if anything was done wrong, where was this self-proclaimed watch-dog? Richter cannot divorce herself from this or any other past council actions."
But you seem to be so full of praise for Bateman. Wasn't he also part of the same council? And isn't it the duty of ALL councillors to be "watchdogs"
"It now appears that Mayor Green has performed another of his now famous flip-flops."
Oh, and one more thing.
Could you please post some of these famous flip flops.
Incidently, I see on another blog where Al Irwin may be running for mayor. Isn't it a little early to be campaigning for him?
Horny Toad
If Green was doing something about it he would have gushed to the media about saving us. We said what we said because in this letter he admits to throwing up his hands and accepting no federal money as the final word.
Yes, all of council should be watchdogs and most are. We praised Bateman for his constant attention to focusing on the facts instead of personality issues like Green & Richter.
The flip-flops you would be sure to disagree with, but the big one was the full-time fire fighters and Walnut Grove and the whole LEC and bringing it out of in-camera.
Al Irwin was being honest with his opinions, but Bucky couldn't allow that. Must have caught some flack.
It would appear to this reader that Mayor Green is attempting to distance himself from responsibility surrounding federal funding of the LEC. This may not be his intention, but it certainly looks like he's pointing at incumbent council members and saying "Look they dropped the ball, I would never have let this happen."... Either way, his reaction to this issue is anything but constructive.
It would have been nice to see the Mayor respond to this funding issue with a plan, or at least intentions to continue the search for funding - even if those funds come after building completion through sponsors or some other creative means. Instead it appears that he reacted, and has attacked at least one Councilor.
I'm not bashing the Mayor, I think he is missing a great opportunity to show us that he is the leader he claims to be... I guess only time will tell.
Great observations destro. You would think that the mayor would want to see this challenge as an opportunity to make good on his promise of engaging other orders of government to get Langley what they need. Was this promise only for new initiatives to be started on him or is the promise for all things that will be good for the TOL?
This Editorial Board still holds out hope that Mayor Green will produce detailed plans soon that will make clear to the taxpayers how he will deliver on his numerous promises. Then we can be good business people and judge performance on a standard that can be established from the detailed plan.
Councillor Richter has eluded to performance measurement with the Kurt Alberts administration. Will she now require the same of this mayor? That would be a good thing. Let's see if she puts forth a Notice of Motion, eh?
"Then we can be good business people and judge performance on a standard that can be established from the detailed plan."
Why would you want to start now when it is abundantly clear you didn't do that with the financing fiasco brought on by the last mayor and council.
Horny Toad
Actually several of us have monitored Township Council for some time and frequently we have asked questions of former Mayor Kurt Alberts and various members of council. We read ALL of the reports that council receives from staff that are public and not in-camera. We ask questions when we are not clear on points of something that council is addressing. I'm certain we do more research than 99.9% of the people that vote in the TOL, including yourself. While you are asking the questions, do you read the full council package each week Horny Toad?
So we did our homework and asked questions of former Mayor Alberts related to the LEC. We knew that construction overruns would not cause the TOL to kick in more money, as it was a fixed contract. We knew that there were active discussions for federal funds. We also knew that the project could have been completed without the $5M, but then the furnish level of facility would not command the attention of certain "buyers" of these services unless a certain standard level of finish was provided for.
Like former Mayor Alberts and staff, we do not see how one can negotiate and sign a contract for operations when there was no final word from the federal gov and no understanding of what requirements would come with any federal funds.
We also agree that it would be extremely foolish if the TOL turned away $37.5M because they didn't have the $5M for extra furnishings in-hand. The provincial money did have a requirement that the facility be used on Douglas Day and it was. Stop listening to Green and Richter and start checking your facts.
Do you also agree with a certain (very small) business owner/inn keeper that thinks the LEC should have been left empty because of the $5M shortfall? If so, then we won't be able to talk reasonably with you. We can both disagree with respect, but please don't cloud the facts and please investigate things for yourself. It is all out there in the public domain. But negotiations happen in-camera and for good reason. In-camera meetings protect us, the taxpayer.
Incidentally, Councillor Kim Richter places more items in-camera than anyone else on former council, while purporting to favour "open and accountable government" and slamming other councillors for various in-camera discussions that eventually are released to the public. You can't have it both ways Kim!
Finally someone prints the truth about Kim Richter and her numerous in-camera agenda additions. Like you said, the in-camera meeting is required for certain items under the community charter and it is meant to protect us (the taxpayers). It is fine for Kim to put things in-camera to protect us, but she can't then turn and point fingers at her colleagues, accusing them of not being open or accountable.
"Like former Mayor Alberts and staff, we do not see how one can negotiate and sign a contract for operations when there was no final word from the federal gov and no understanding of what requirements would come with any federal funds."
Well then, like Kurt Alberts, you are obviously not business oriented. Contracts are ALWAYS done before you start construction. Are you kidding me when you say the time to strck a contract is AFTER the project is complete. Thats like going to the bank for a mortgage AFTER you purchase the house without knowing how much the interest rate would be.
And the whole argument about the LEC revolves around NOT having all the financing in place prior to construction.
My family will probably never use the LEC but I still think it is a worthwhile project and I do agree with getting the grant from the province.Thats not the argument here although some council members atre using that argument as a smokescreen.
And ,no, I don't think the completion should be held up for the 5M. But I do think that former council members (ALL of them)should be held accountable for the screw-up.
Horny Toad
You truly are clueless who you are lecturing business principles to. You have used this mortgage analogy several times and it only proves your lack of public sector management skills. You are comparing apples to oranges my friend.
We agree to disagree with you. There was no "screw up" and we are certain that as early as the next election Green and Richter will be using this LEC as a shining jewel of their personal accomplishments.
"The flip-flops you would be sure to disagree with, but the big one was the full-time fire fighters and Walnut Grove and the whole LEC and bringing it out of in-camera."
Perhaps you could elaborate on the flip=flop on firefighters.
Horny toad
Sure. Raging Bull said repeatedly during the campaign that he was for full-time fire. He set a relative up in his line-up of friends that asked Kurt Alberts questions (an indication of this mayor's tactics) and didn't reveal this certain son-in-law was a fire fighter until much later.
Then he asked various directors for ideas on how to cut budgets. He moved the issue from in-camera to open council. Why would you do that unless you planned to institute the cut? The fire fighters caught wind of the maneuvering of the mayor and showed up in force.
Although Raging Bull made a bag of wind statement later, he was very shy not to raise his hand for the vote. Even his slate cohort Dornan got caught out as she did raise her had. We had several people there at the meeting. You should have been present to see it. If you were then you wouldn't be asking this question.
What a load. and you talk about a smear campaign.
I'm actually dissapointed that he didn't cut the full time firefighter's budget.
As I see it ,and the majority of TOL taxpayers see it, he said during the election he wouldn't cut the budget, he didn't cut the budget and he announced afterwards he didn't intend to cut the budget.
And besides, its the council that votes on it so he couldn't do it by himself anyway. For someone who professes to know so much about how the municipality operates what with reading all the minutes etc.,you sure don't come accross that way.
But then I guess in your mind anything to help Bateman's campaign for mayor is fine as the end justifies the means.
Horny Toad
Actually Horny Toad he ran on zero-based budgeting (no tax increases) funded by a land trust. He did not talk about service cuts because he knew that once he announced he couldn't do the land trust or the current real estate market won't support it (how convenient!), then he would have to cut, cut, cut.
If you oppose full time firefighters then you disagree with the majority of Langley Township residents. Walnut Grove will have a new bridge and highway within a few months. Truck traffic from Port Kells and more hazardous truck cargo traveling over the bridge and through Walnut Grove. With all that considered maybe you are the one that is not fully aware?
Any blog moderator who resorts to name calling (calling the mayor Raging Bull) but still pretends to be reporting 'the truth' has no legitimacy; especially doing it from a position of anonymity. At least Bateman and Richter have the guts to put their names to their blogs. You folks are a waste of time.
Editors of major newspapers give politicians nicknames and comment on their behavior or actions all the time. Political cartoons are generally very cutting in nature as well. I guess those would be considered a "waste of time" by you as well? Apparently you don't get out much and you are content to overlook Mayor Green's personality faults that greatly impact negatively on his job performance.
Although Richter's name appears on the blog, the LFP Editor is totally anonymous and they never discuss or disclose who it is. The world has thousands of blogs who's editors are anonymous, and some do so because they are well-known personalities in the community (not us!)
We have a Freedom of the Press that we enjoy in this country and our observations are based on the facts. An analysis of the numbers of unique people that come to this blog, how they find this blog and how long they spend reading the various pages are all available to us and we study them daily. You are therefore in a very small minority my friend!
Hey Sam P,
If you are so interested in knowing, let us see your full name, address, and phone number for confirmation?
Horny,
The problem with you is what they say "Green/Richter" and what they do are two different things.
The editor of the langley record is trying to explain that to you on several occasions and you do not want to listen.
Instead of defending politicians, ask questions and listen to the answers and not just the answers you want to hear.
You talk about Alberts having an agenda, I have heard more agendas coming from Green/Richter in the last 45 days than I have ever heard coming from the Alberts camp.
I know you are upset and you think its all an attack campaign. Unless Green/Richter come out with their planned platform, the hard questions will always be asked of them. Right now, they are not answering them to the satisfaction of the taxpayer.
Post a Comment