Mayor Green Hires Olympic Village Bureaucrat

The Langley Record's Exclusive Expose'

Recently rookie Mayor Rick Green announced in the newspaper (and our blog) that he had hired on a consultant for the Township of Langley to investigate the possibility of establishing a real estate trust and examine the viability of such a plan during this economic downturn.

This hiring did not require council approval or pre-knowledge, and therefore was not made public until the newspaper announcement by Mayor Green.

Most municipalities in greater Vancouver are being very cautious with their real estate dealings and development after the City of Vancouver announced that the ongoing development of the Olympic Village Project, interchangeably referred to as “Southeast False Creek project” recently ran into funding issues that could cost Vancouver taxpayers over a BILLION dollars to bail out, should other funding sources not materialize.

However Mayor Green announced that the Township has hired Mr. Bruce Maitland, “…co-parent of the city’s Southeast False Creek project” (as the Vancouver Sun called him here) as a paid consultant to the Township. You can see from there articles here, here and here that Mr. Maitland was a key stakeholder in Vancouver’s now-troubled Olympic Village project.

The taxpayers of Langley must, in the interest of the principles of openness, transparency, accountability and full disclosure, be informed that Mayor Green’s election team broadcast e-mailed this Endorsement Letter written by new Township consultant Bruce Maitland, to many businesspeople and residents of the Township of Langley, ahead of the November 2008 election. In fact that endorsement was the first any member of the Editorial Board had heard of Mr. Maitland who lives in Willoughby and we think has been given the job of making big bucks off Langley’s land portfolio to pay for the Mayor’s poorly planned 0% tax freeze.

We say think because it seems very unclear to Township Council and the taxpayers as to just how much this consultant will cost the taxpayers and what the EXACT outcome or deliverables Mayor Green plans for us to get from this spending. Councillor Mel Kositsky recently tried to nail down the exact cost of this consulting engagement to the taxpayers at a Council meeting, but the mayor remained very tight-lipped about the details of this contract. So much for openness and transparency.

The only response from Township Hall has been that as this consulting contract was for 20-40 hours of time, therefore no prior council discussion or vote was required. We know Mayor Raging Bull loves to swing the power of his office around kind of like Sam Sullivan used to do in Vancouver. He has done so again by announcing the Maitland contract. Councillor Kositsky, a longtime advocate of proper public process, again tried to query just how much this 20-40 hours is costing us, to which there was no official or public response from Mayor Green.

Mayor Raging Bull, upset by the questions, in fact replied by listing Mr. Maitland’s credentials which sounded good on the surface. Interesting the supposedly transparent Mayor neglected to mention the Olympic Village deal or Mr. Maitland’s election endorsement.

Mr. Maitland is beside the point here. He may be an excellent bureaucrat and he may be the best in his field. We will never have that confidence because we have a rookie mayor who promised transparency and has been showing anything but. His finance committee is stocked with his friends and insiders. He has now overseen and announced the hiring of a consultant who endorsed him in the last election. This is not good government or good business for that matter.

For the loyal blog readers out there, you will note that it is not very often that the Langley Record’s Editorial Board agrees with blog regular posters “Willy Nilly” and “Horny Toad”. But in this instance we must agree with these two that the Township of Langley must exercise an abundance of caution with regards to real estate deals within the Township. Some recent blog posts from these two prolific commentators:

“Regardless of whether the economy went in the dumper or not the MAIN reason for the Olympic village fiasco is due to BAD BUSINESS PRACTICES. Its like putting all your money in the stock market and blaming the market when you loose. It was a gamble and the City of Vancouver lost. Good article in the Sun the other day on WHY cities should stick to what they are supposed to do and stay away from property development. There is a reason WHY property developers make a lot of money (usually) and that is because they know what they are doing.
Good lesson to all cities.”

Horny Toad | 01.16.09 - 5:44 pm


"they will sell for good money after the winter Olympics, and Vancouver (and the Province) will recover the investment costs".

“I see you're into clairvoyance now Boomer. I hope you're right, but unfortunately NOBODY knows and if they say things, as you did, it only means hopeful wishing. There is NO basis for your conclusion. I have been following most of the senior economists and they have differing opinions, and admit to not knowing. So, I wonder how you're able to predict that.

The US thought their real estate had to have hit the bottom 6 months ago, well, guess what, its still falling and they predict the worst is yet to come. Heck, if we can go down South and buy luxury condo's, townhouses, homes, for $100.000.00 in areas where there is no winter, why would anyone buy our condos?
We have major competition now in the Real Estate market, and our biggest buyers were from the US and Asia. Well, the US is not buying now and I have just learned that prices are falling in China, so that is probably going to be lost as well.”

willynilly | 01.16.09 - 10:15 pm


The Langley Record Editorial Board Comments:

Horny Toad believes the City of Vancouver exercised “bad business practices” with their Olympic Village/Southeast False Creek land deal. He believes land deals like this are a “gamble” with taxpayer’s assets at best and “the City of Vancouver lost.”

Willy Nilly opines this Olympic Village/Southeast False Creek land deal was nothing more than “hopeful wishing” and that real estate prices are still going to hell in a hand basket each and every day and the experts “predict the worse is yet to come” as Willy Nilly points out.

What will Green apologists such as Horny Toad and Willy Nilly say now? One of the “co-parents” of this Vancouver Mega Project gone sour, has been given the deed to Langley’s landbase by their Mayor Green.

Time for the rookie Mayor to come clean with the voters. We trust that the next Mayor’s Report will include the full details, terms of reference and costs of this consulting engagement and that he will come clean with his credentials and the fact he endorsed the Mayor. The local papers should also look through their parent company’s archives and report this matter. Our transparent Mayor must be held to account on this issue.

Other Related Reference Articles to Vancouver's Current Olympic Village Crisis:

Olyblog
OlyBlog
UPI
Vancouver Sun
Globe and Mail
Boston.com
Washington Post
Bloomberg

So What Does Mayor Fassbender Think?

The Editorial Board was having its regular coffee meeting this morning and reviewing various statements that have been repeated by our rookie mayor, Rick Green. One such repeated statement has been a soundbite regarding heavy rail traffic going through the "heart of our community".

If one reviews this rail line, we see that the alignment enters the Township of Langley along the outer edge of mostly agricultural lands with low-density housing and businesses in those areas, then along Hwy. 10/Glover Road where it finally enters the City of Langley. If one was to look at the "heart of our community" with regards to this heavy rail traffic, the greatest impact is in the heart of Langley City.

We wondered this morning what Mayor Peter Fassbender of the City of Langley thinks about Mayor Green's statements regarding his municipality? Is this a subtle way of Mayor Green suggesting that the age old debate of the City of Langley amalgamating with the Township progress? Does Mayor Green aspire to expand his kingdom?  Just wondering.

Langley Record Exclusive Expose'

For several weeks now the Langley Record has been researching some external public sources and gathering materials related to a matter that should raise alarm bells in the Township of Langley.

Join us as our research is presented this Saturday morning to the taxpayers of the Township, so that they may once again draw their own conclusions. It's not often that this Editorial Board agrees with Willy Nilly and Horny Toad, but in this instance we must agree with them on this one. The Countdown Clock is ticking away. Stay tuned!

Highlights of Monday Meetings of Township of Langley Council

TOL Council Special Meeting - January 19, 2009

Welcome to the new Langley Record quote format with regards to Township special and regular council meetings. We will not ignore commentary, however we will provide overwhelmingly more direct quotes on what was said and allow readers of the Langley Record to draw their own conclusions. Over time, perhaps we will provide introductions to sections and post audio files on the topics. As we have hours of audio files, we will post over the next week select discussions that council had and that we consider to be important to the community. Let us know what you think about the new format and please provide your input on what council discussed.

Council Discussion on Committees and Commissions

Coun. Kositsky pointed out that current council Standing Committees have been suspended since the new mayor took office and proposed a set of new Mayor’s Standing Committees and Taskforces that may duplicate the committees that are established by Bylaw and Coun. Kositsky questioned under what authority the Standing Committees were suspended, given that they are established by Bylaw.

Coun. Richter: “I had a question with regards to the selection process. Now you’ve indicated that you will be advertising and people can apply, but who makes the decision as to who is appointed?"

Mayor Green: “Are we talking about the Standing Committees?

Coun. Richter: “No, the mayor’s committees.”

Mayor Green: “Yeah, the mayor’s Standing Committees. I think that should be a discussion of council. I’m certainly prepared to have that discussion then. It’s really because of the Taskforce format in particular that I sort of want to keep that open. So we are not talking about a standing committee format in that case. In the area of protective services I think it really get’s down to basically just the quality of individuals that apply, their bio and their resume and I think council should be a part of that process.”

Coun. Richter: “OK, but I was going to suggest that if it’s a mayor’s committee, the mayor gets to make the choice."

Mayor Green: “Well I think technically I can pull that string if I have to, and I certainly want to show the discourse that I think is necessary to move this along. I’ll certainly make my feelings known. I feel comfortable going through that process”

Coun. Ferguson: “I guess the difference in a select committee and a standing committee… on a select committee you have a number of folks sitting around the table from the public, using Langley residents. [Example of Agricultural Committee given and other discussion]. Now the select committee you would have less people working maybe on specific things and it would come back to council, but you would have less members of the public involved. And I guess that would be the difference in philosophy. Would it be an issue of duplication or just less input from the public?”

“When would we be looking at some of these other mayor’s standing committees? And just looking at your list you have here and I know you’ve only talked about a couple. Horses, transportation, community, culture, and other things and I’m just wondering when they would come into place?”

Mayor Green: “I can’t answer that question.”

Coun. Ferguson: “You got kind of a guestimate or something?”

Mayor Green: “Um, no I don’t. Not at this moment.”

Coun. Ferguson: “OK, when would we be reviewing it again to look at it? A month from now? Two months from now? Six months from now?”

Mayor Green: “I…Councillor Ferguson I really can’t….we have an awful lot of work to do and to get through and budgeting and everything else in terms of priorities. I really can’t give you any indication at this point.”

Coun. Richter: “I had a question. Why do we need an Economic Development Taskforce? What’s the intent of this taskforce? What’s its mandate going to be? And similarly, why do we need a Protective Services Taskforce? What would it’s mandate be? And where I’m going with these questions is wouldn’t it be easier that instead of having these four committees, wouldn’t it be easier just to change the work plan for the select committees? So whatever task is being set before the Economic Development Taskforce…that we give that task to the select committee, and similarly with the Protective Services. But I’ve really like to know what the” [discussion ended abruptly by speaker as mayor injects his thoughts].

Mayor Green: “Well I think the…If I may. First of all let’s deal with the first one. The Standing Committee on Protective Services. In my view it deals probably in a higher overview of the issues surrounding policing and protective issues in our community. It involves…it might involve… yes it will involve fewer because you have to have 50% of that to be from members of council. But it will have a few key members of the community that can involve the community in the process. Involving the community in helping the police department and the fire department in terms of gathering assets, gathering donated assets and other things that may be supplied to the police department to allow them to do a better job, that may not be able to be provided through the regular budget process.”

“Secondly, the issue of the taskforce. I could I guess change the mandate of the Economic Development Committee. Other than to say a taskforce deals with a more focused view of in this particular case, economic development. What I would like them to look at is what I would call a 30,000 foot view of the Township of Langley. Where do we stand today in terms of our industrial and commercial land with a 100,000 population? Where are we going to stand in 13-15 or 20 years from now with a population of 168,000 to 200,000 population. How much acreage do we have available to us in industrial and commercial space? How unbalanced will our taxation be between residential and commercial and/industrial?”

“I think we all know that residential taxation…residential development doesn’t pay for itself. A lot of it is in the industrial/commercial tax area. I’d like to see them in a higher end and I think we have a number of people that are on the Economic Development Committee that could morph into this. But essentially develop a tax model for the municipality going forward, and what that might look like recognizing their interest and involvement in economic development and business. And they will bring a private view, a private enterprise view if you will, of where our challenges are going to be. Where our challenges are going to be in transportation, location, and what does that look like?...

Coun. Richter: “Well I guess where I’m coming from is that usually with a taskforce they have a specific mandate or end point and what you just said is basically you want a tax model for the municipality with regards to industrial, commercial, and residential. That’s the end point. That’s what you want them to come up with. Now looking at our existing Economic Development Commission, I don’t understand why they couldn’t do that job. I think they would be quite capable of doing that job, and it might be very meaningful work for them to be doing."

"Secondly with regards to Protective Services, again, what is the end point? Is the end point for them to come up with a recommendation that there be a police commission, or an assessment of whether there should be a police commission. If that’s the end point then it should be specified. And that may be something that the Community Safety group could do."

"It seems to me that one of the criticisms that was levied against our committee structure prior to the review was that there are good and well-meaning and capable individuals in the community, that are spinning their wheels at these meetings and not achieving allot. I would not want to see us create a parallel or duplicate structure that’s going to result in the same thing. I think if we can meld the two together, we kill two birds with one stone. We give meaningful work to the committees that already exist and we get the end points that we want to have achieved."

"So my recommendation is that instead of having separate committees or suspending committees, I’d just change the work plan for the Select Committees to focus them in on the next year on those specific end points.”

[Mayor’s discussion of Community Charter not allowing a Police Board and his views of a taskforce and what that looks like (project focused).]

Coun. Richter: “I see duplication. If we are going to have 8 different taskforces of the mayor, all with 3 members of council, council is not going to have any time to do anything else other than to go to these committee meetings. And I am concerned about that.”

Mayor Green: “I would suggest that won’t be the case.”

Coun. Richter: “And not just council, but staff members as well. I mean it takes an incredible amount of staff resources to run these committees.”

[Editor’s note of Councillor Bateman’s nodding of head in agreement to Councillor Richter’s statements. How much does all this staff time cost as Coun. Richter pointed out?]

[Coun. Kositsky comments about all of the volunteers that have applied for committees and are awaiting word on their applications since December. He also pointed out the Bylaw for the various committees and doesn’t understand how the mayor can suspend committees now in violation of the Bylaw.]

Coun. Kositsky: “These are council advisory committees and the mayor can form any committees he wants, but for the sake of the volunteers we need some direction Your Worship”

[Mayor directs discussion to Mark Bakken, TOL Administrator for comment. Mayor promises Terms of Reference for next council meeting.]

[Bob Long moves to move forward with Youth Commission and Parks. Administrator suggests discussion in Special Closed session during dinner break. Mayor suggests all committee appointments happen at the same time.]

End of public discussion on this topic.

Councillor Kositsky wrote a Letter to the Editor in the Langley Times.

Council Recap Coming Soon

The Editorial Board of the Langley Record is sitting around with cups of coffee and watching the US Presidential Inauguration of Barack Obama. Our faithful TOL Council representative has recorded the two council meetings as he started to do for us last week and later today and tonight we will be posting our council recap.

Our representative did comment as he dropped the recording off to us, that Mayor Rick Green starting in the last council meeting and now this one to change direction. As we said, we will report the good, the bad and the ugly. This is really good for the taxpayers of the TOL, in that Mayor Rick has for the most part, put aside the campaign rhetoric and is getting down to work WITH council. That is refreshing and greatly needed, and we congratulate the mayor on his decision to engage council and get things done.  More to come later today!

Advance Notice - Important Council Meeting This Monday

District Heating

Last year Councillor Jordan Bateman moved a motion to have staff investigate the provision of District Heating in new neighbourhoods. This innovative and green energy solution to use such things as geothermal sources to heat large areas of homes has been looked at and staff have now issued The Potential for District Heating in New Neighbourhoods report.

There is now a recommendation that council receive this report and approve a pre-feasibility study to identify potential opportunities and energy cources available to operate heating systems within the TOL. This could lead to much cheaper heating for residents and some potential cash generation for the Township. If devleopers are required to install these systems as part of the development process and the TOL created a public utility, there is the potential for profit. This discussion will take place in the 4:00pm Special Council Meeting. You can read the full staff report here.

Roundabouts

Also during the Special Council Meeting at 4:00pm, staff will be making a presentation on roundabouts. This should be interesting and we assume that staff will be supporting this traffic calming tool where strategic.

Brown's Pit

The Province of BC plans to use Brown's Pit for gravel extraction and was a vone of contention during last year's municipal election in the TOL. But the Township is a creation of the provincial government and can do little to halt this plan by the province. During this week's regular council meeting on Monday, January 19, 2009 at 7:00pm, several deletions will be speaking about the Brown Pit plan.

Mufford Cresent Overpass

Another big election topic centered around the long-proposed Mufford overpass project with many residents claiming that no prior public consultations took place. We previously outlined the process and clearly there was some consultations. People simply miss them at times and then blame others for their mistakes. At the end of this Monday's council meeting under Other Business there are two motions related to the Mufford overpass.

Notice of Motion By Councillor Kim Richter at the January 12, 2009 Regular Meeting of Council:

Mufford Crescent / Glover Road
Whereas the Mufford/Glover Overpass is a significant development and financial project, and all of Council should hear from the public on this matter; therefore

Be it resolved that a public hearing style of Council meeting be held following the open houses so that all members of Council can hear from the residents.

LR Editor's Note: Not bad...short and to the point!

Councillor Kositsky presented the following Notice of Motion within the deadlines according to Council’s Policy:

Mufford Crescent / Glover Road
Whereas a lot of time, energy and money has been spent on trying to address the traffic safety issues surrounding the T-intersection at Mufford Crescent and Highway 10; and

Whereas Langley Township has been preparing various options to take to the public for consideration and review, including presentations to Council from citizen groups and individuals; and

Whereas all of those options involve using farmland and sensitive environmental areas; and

Whereas the Township of Langley will be facing critical financial challenges due to the global economic downturn - and the federal and provincial governments are talking about looming deficits, forcing local governments to carefully evaluate their priorities; and

Whereas the majority of the traffic safety problems and congestion at the T-intersection are caused by having two railway crossings too close together;

Be it resolved that Langley Township Council direct staff for safety purposes to close the T-intersection at Mufford Crescent, such as putting up proper fencing along the tracks and/or cement blocks to impede traffic; and

That Mufford Crescent become a local traffic only road, making it safer for existing businesses to operate, with a cul-de-sac created (as necessary) west of the train tracks and an alternate route be explored with Langley City to allow traffic to flow back to the Highway 10 Bypass through 62nd Avenue; and

That any Township of Langley funds currently set aside for the proposed Mufford overpass and new road project be directed to improvements to 208th Street from the 62nd Avenue border with the City to 96th Avenue, where there will be connections with the Golden Ears Bridge; and

That the 208th Street upgrade also include completing the 208th Street Highway One overpass to full interchange status, expanding it to four lanes and creating on and off ramps, as it was designed for; and

That the Township of Langley apply for funding to both the Gateway project, Translink and any federal government infrastructure grants for the improvements to 208th Street and highway interchange.

LR Editor's Note: OK, so Councillor Richter is no the only one to write long motions, but in this case we should all agree it was warranted based on the description required.