Finally - A Current Photo

We were shocked and in disbelief when we saw this current photo of Mayor Rick Green (in the Langley Times no less) not looking too happy after a grilling on his expenses that we reported on here earlier.

No one that we spoke with believes that the Township just doles out cheques without approvals and all 15 of the people that voted here believe that Mayor Green had to know about this money. It is very interesting to see that each time Mayor Green is confronted by facts, he chooses to blame staff and tries to shift the responsibility to them.

Remember This One?

Mayor's Drop-In Forum Advertising - Green claims he circled only the title wanted it larger, but this is not what was circled. Green blames staff for the size, saying he had no input into the design or authorizing it, despite his initials and a quote from him.

Or How About:

Letters Sent With Council Member Names On Letterhead - When questioned by Cllrs. Fox and Richter about letters sent to various government departments without Council approval, Mayor Green tried to place the blame on Township Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) Mark Bakken.

Or Better Yet:

Secret Meetings of Mayor's Committee On Finance - 25 firefighters and members of the press and community turned up for a meeting of the Finance Committee. Mayor Green claimed that this was a "workshop of the committee" and staff had approved of this form of meeting that did not get advertised as per Township Bylaw.

It is NO secret that Mayor Rick Green blames his ineffectiveness as a mayor on Council, the CAO, municipal staff, or anyone but himself. It seems that he is not responsible for anything and the problem is with anyone other than him! Can it be that despite not being able to get along with Council, staff, other mayors and community leaders, the problem is not Rick Green?

Mayor Green is actively campaigning to have the public vote this current Council out and elect his slate of candidates that he started to build within a week of the last election. Township voters better not get suckered into this ploy, as one must examine who really is responsible for all this mess. Examine the facts and see for yourself. Even The Langley Times may be starting to get it.

Public Input - Continuing The Discussion

This week Editor Bob Groeneveld of The Langley Advance published this Opinion piece. He makes it clear that even if all the seats of the Municipal Facility are fully for a public hearing, those 160 - 200 seats are still but a fraction of the now 104,000 people that call Langley Township home.

If council's final decision agrees with those numbers, the "winners" will applaud the triumph of democracy - and the "losers" will point out that a simple head-count at a public hearing is meaningless, in the final analysis, because even well-attended hearings, like the one concerning much of Fort Langley over the past two weeks, attracts only a small minority of the total population of the area affected.

At the end of the day, the rule of municipal democracy still comes down to the council table, and the weight that council members put on the votes they need to get re-elected, the contributions they'll need for their next election campaign, and - if democracy really, truly is working well - the facts of the issue, as they pertain to the greater good of the entire community.

-- Bob Groeneveld

We highlighted "entire community" because this is what we see is lacking in the current process and the politicking of a few council members (including Mayor Green). Instead of relying on the facts and greater good of the entire community, Green and company use this group of vocal residents to solidify their political futures. Or so they think...

The 208th Street Open House attracted approximately 750 people and that included many who do not live anywhere near 208th Street. Then look at how many people came out from Walnut Grove as compared with Willoughby. Are these numbers as substantial as The Langley Times (or Green Times) made them out to be?

Most new developments on 208th have added 1,000 - 1,500 people per development. If we took five developments along 208th alone, that would conservatively be 5,000 residents. Is 750 out of 5,000 and overwhelming response? Enough people for council to throw away all plans and leave things as they are? How many people live in Fort Langley? 91 people spoke for or against and that includes many repeat speakers (people who spoke more than once). Why wasn't it reported that a substantial group of silent and respectable people wore "Support The Plan" stickers in support of Parklane?

Good on Groeneveld for being well-balanced, rational and accurate. Now if more rational people in the community look at facts and operate from them (in place of emotions), Langley will be a better place for it.

Is Rick Green Worth The Expense?

Council recently released the annual report of mayor and council expenses in the Township. We have remained silent, but some serious questions need to be investigated and answered. Primarily the controversy centers around Mayor Rick Green's expenses.

Kurt Alberts was on a self-imposed salary of roughly $40K and donated all his automatic salary increases. I had said $58K at one time and was corrected. Rick Green makes $93K per year and with his Metro Vancouver pay he is at $120K ++ I was able to locate expenses for Former Mayor Kurt Alberts for 2007. Here is the comparison:

Former Mayor Kurt Alberts 2007 Expenses = $ 2,419

Mayor Rick Green's 2008 Expenses = $ 12,620

Why do you suppose that for the same work and meetings, Mayor Rick Green has managed to spend 10 times more than Former Mayor Kurt Alberts? How does that happen? We watched the webcast of the Special Meeting of Council on Monday and when questioned by Council members, Green stated that he received the money "automatically". He claims to have not had to submit receipts or sign anything for the expenses. He stressed this 4 times during the discussion, cutting Council members off to do so.

The Langley Record is investigating this claim, but so far Green's statements do not add up. We checked with several municipal experts and thus far, all say that Mayor Green would have to sign to approve these expenses. It is routine and a required municipal accounting practice and process. Stay tuned. If the local newspapers don't do their homework, we will do a Freedom of Information Request to get you the facts.

What do you think about this 10 fold increase in the mayor's expenses, despite Mayor Green getting a salary more than 5 times that of his predecessor and getting 1/3 of that tax free by statute?

Wisdom On Public Input Sessions

As one of the Editorial Board members, I had an opportunity this week to meet with someone I consider to be a very wise and practical man. For many years he has quietly served our Township in a volunteer capacity and with little recognition. He has no special interests, and is TRULY only concerned with our community. He has been distressed at our state of affairs and the fact that our community pride has been tarnished with the current political climate.

At one point during our conversations we talked about public open houses and public input sessions. We agreed that public input is necessary and good for our community. But it seems that our current system is flawed in a BIG way. Lately some political leaders are using "public input" as a divisive tool that seeks nothing but to advance their political agendas. The results of these sessions create an "us and them" mentality in the minds of the participants. Even though the groups that turn out represent a minuscule fraction of the real population of a neighbourhood or the ToL as a whole, these people feel they are the majority. This has intimidated many residents that may have opposing views and has resulted in the non-militant people quietly listening to these groups and not speaking publicly. After all, what's the point when it is clear that a couple of politicians are against you and are pandering to the crowd.

This wise man that I know and trust made a very good point. He has observed many of these public processes as have I and has come to roughly the same conclusions. Many of the people that attend do so out of an emotional drive because of some proposed development that will impact their immediate area. They do not read the staff reports or details of the issue and claim to have no time to do so. They rely on their neighbours to provide "the facts" over the fence. Before attending the public input session, they are determined to defeat this development at all cost and believe that Township staff and some politicians have tried to "push this through" or in some way conspired to make their lives miserable.

At the public sessions they bite a donut and drink the coffee. Some may take a cursory look at the story boards, but most would rather give staff hell, ask questions and then not allow staff to answer. But, the bite of the donut and a sip of coffee has suddenly made them "experts" on the issue and they know far more than the engineers and planners. They appear at the council meeting where some politicians smile and glow.

The meeting begins with the sideshow kicking into high gear. Pandering to the crowd now takes priority over any real and meaningful care for our community. Despite the fact that mayor and council are meant to speak with each other during the meeting, that is scrapped in favour of public speeches and the putting down of other councillors that oppose them. The crowd goes wild and cheerful political smiles abound. The Grand Finale is a passionate opposition vote for the subject at hand. Major pandering to the crowd, vocal opposition to those councillors in favour of the issue, etc. Is this community better for all this? You be the judge.

How Not To Obtain Public Input

Opinion

When the Township of Langley lost former Mayor Kurt Alberts, in the opinion of our Editorial Board, we lost a significant piece of what is Langley. Under Mayor Alberts everyone was treated with respect and everyone's voice was heard. People weren't always content with the outcome of the council vote, but most felt their opinions mattered and were taken into account. Of course there will always be the fringe of malcontents that even Mother Theresa could not please, but for the most part community pride and unity was evident.

Public input sessions and open houses are now being used by some Township politicians as a clear device to stir citizen anger, distrust and ultimately community disunity. Neighbour is suddenly against neighbour. People are allowed to act out in the public hearings that are an extension of council. Like a sideshow, the Chair (Mayor Rick Green) allows applause and booing. Disrespectful people are allowed to heckle Township Councillors openly. As the Chair despises these men, he allows this. Anyone wishing to speak against what the pack wants, must now think twice if they wish to speak publicly. After all, who wants to be publicly humiliated when the mayor and some council members condone this behaviour?

Although 160-175 people show up for these Public Hearings, like elections these numbers are far from the majority of Township residents that now number over 100,000. It is VERY clear that the Township of Langley desperately needs a return to civility and tolerance. It is mandatory that Public Hearings not be used to further the political ambitions of a couple and be divisive tools that will divide our community for the long-term.

Public input and involvement is critical to a municipal government. We elect officials to provide governance and direction to staff. We entrust these men and women with decision-making authority. Yet with far too many decisions to call a public hearing on everything, we need to be reasonable people. We need to express our opinion while respecting our neighbours. We need to inform and encourage those around us to make proper decisions, but we must do so without threats and disrespectful intolerance.

The Township of Langley is in desperate need of a new system of public input that draws the majority of residents into the mix and allows for a more complete public input process. The Township of Langley needs leadership that is not divisive and self-serving.

Rick Green Spends Money That Is Not His

The Township of Langley has Bylaws that guide how our government operates. Bylaws make things fair for all and seek to serve all equally. On Monday, June 14th Township Council will have a Public Hearing night and one of the subjects will be the final phase of Bedford Landing in Fort Langley.

In accordance with the Township Bylaw, staff mail notices to households within a stated area of the proposed development along with advertising in the local newspapers and a sign on the proposed site. All who are affected thereby receive legal notice of the meeting and can attend the Public Hearing.

The Public Hearing notification Bylaw more importantly establishes cost recovery for these mailed notices and such. The Township processes the mailing and then bills the developer for the costs of said notification.

About a week ago, Mayor Rick Green short-circuited the Public Hearing Bylaw and ordered a letter that was drafted by him to be distributed to all Fort Langley residents. Because the mayor's notification was outside the Bylaw, all Township taxpayers are now stuck with the bill for the mayor's letter. Are all Township residents happy to fund Mayor Green's re-election campaign? More importantly, now that the Bylaw has apparently been violated, will this now mean that the Township will have to notify all residents of all affected communities moving forward and in order to be fair to all? How much is this going to cost us taxpayers?

Mayor Rick Green did not vote for the budget in 2009 and also in 2010. How is it that he is allowed to circumvent the Bylaw and cause ToL taxpayers to incur these expenses? All Township residents should be outraged by this flagrant abuse of power.

Interesting Statistics

We thought we would switch gears for a minute and look at a provincial issue - taxation. The anti-HST people are geared up and ready for a fight. They speak as if the NDP is our savior. Here are some interesting Tax Facts comparing taxation today vs. the NDP yester-year:

Your Provincial Income Taxes

Under the NDP in 1996 vs. Today

Example B.C. Household	Taxes in 1996	Taxes Today	Savings
Two Income Family of Four - $90,000 Income	$6,935	$3,195	$3,740
Two Income Family of Four - $60,000 Income	$3,290	$1,320	$1,970
Two Income Family of Four - $30,000 Income	$1,284	$0	$1,284
Unattached Individual - $25,000 Income	$1,402	$376	$1,026
Unattached Individual - $80,000 Income	$8,881	$4,080	$4,801
Senior Couple, Equal Pensions - $30,000 Income	$718	$0	$718

Small Business Income Tax Reductions

Your local neighbourhood small businesses are the driving force behind B.C.'s economy. In fact, small businesses account for nearly 98 per cent of all businesses in British Columbia - which is why the BC Liberals targeted tax reduction to ensure they can reach their full potential.

Example Neighbourhood Business	Taxes in 1996	Taxes Today	Savings
Neighbourhood Pizzeria - $200,000 income	$18,000	$5,000	$13,000
Independent Pet Store - $400,000 income	$51,000	$10,000	$41,000
Local Produce Store - $750,000 income	$108,750	$38,750	$70,000

And More Than 120 Additional Tax Decreases

Since taking office in 2001, the BC Liberals made over 120 tax cuts, helping B.C. thrive during good times, and weather bad economic times better than almost any other jurisdiction in the western world.

Our other tax cuts and tax credits include:

• New Northern and Rural Homeowner Benefit
• Enhanced Shelter Aid for Elderly Renters (SAFER) Program
• New Low Income Climate Action Tax Credit
• Eliminated Corporate Capital Tax
• Enhanced BC Mining Flow-Through Share Tax Credit
• Enhanced Small Business Venture Capital Tax Credit

Battle For Your Mind

This week there were more messages sent to you through the local newspapers to get you to believe that a whole bunch of people are wrong and only one certain local mayor is right. Just as we presented to you in this article and others, a re-election campaign was announced two months ago and a letter writing campaign have never ceased since the election. The latest smokescreen are presented here.

1. This usual trash talk against Township Council by Big Greenie, Robert Moats. A man that is never happy and sees it his duty to complain about everything. Notice the tone, personal insults and condescending arrogance of a man relegated to writing chain letters for his hero. Yes, that same old "victim" that we hear so much about. The world is wrong and his man is right. Go figure. You might find Moats on the Green Slate that is being organized as we speak. They may try to hide the names, or they may just publicly bring it all out of the closet. But they do prefer to operate in secret and assume that the electorate are fools. The arrogance that someone as unskilled as Mayor Green is supposed to boss around and tell engineers and other well-qualified professionals "what to do"? This guy doesn't realize that it is staff holding the boat together and they have no personal interest in the outcomes of decisions. Get a life and stop breathing the wrong end of those horses doctor.
2. Next up is this gem from a City of Langley resident that is always trying to tell the Township what to do. Riddled with inaccurate statements and once again a Greenie Weenie at work. See the trend yet? See that mayor "victim"?
3. Several Fill Site letters (yes, another "fight" issue for his troops) were published again this week by The Langley Times of course. Hell, Bucholtz could just fire all the reporters and simply publish letters from the Greenie Weenies. He may as well, as we have evidence that on several occasions The Times had to re-print online articles and editorials, editing upcoming print editions after a call from the mayor's office.
   

Greenie Weenie Issues to Watch:

• Fill Sites
• Aquifers
• Salmon River Uplands
  
• 208th Street
• Bedford Landing
• Mufford/64th Overpass
• Fill in the blank of anything where a group of people rise up to challenge. Forget the facts, as for this mayor, facts just get in the way of a good story and more support for the campaign already announced. Stay tuned for more issues!

What the local rags won't tell you is that many of this week's letter writers DO NOT live in Fort Langley. Also, the guy who bitches the loudest about the Salmon River Uplands is one of the few people that were allowed to develop and live in that area and now he wants to prevent everyone else from doing anything up there. Go figure!

Rick For Ruler?

Several interesting bits in today's news and of note to Township residents. Our Editorial Board was working late to verify all the facts. These news stories only serve to validate our last posting about Mayor Rick Green's behind-the-scenes and out-front publicity campaign and his ability to attach himself to Township resident concerns without providing any concrete solutions.

First is Green's Letter Writing organization and their ability to get this silly letter published in The Times (where else?). Are you in favour of throwing the Community Charter out and allowing the mayor to become your Dictator or Ruler? Interesting that Candidate Green suggested that former Mayor Kurt Alberts had a stronghold on power in the Township, but Green's supporters now suggest that we give Green ultimate rule. Again this letter writer suggests that 8 Council members are all wrong and Green is the victim. See the theme? See these letters? Most people including the Township Council simply ignore them now. But hey, it keeps Times Editor Frank Bucholtz employed in between taking jabs at politicians family members.

Next we have another Rick Green "Fight" article about the 208th Major Road Network and Truck Route. Green is on your side folks and he has been listening and will VOTE AGAINST IT FOR YOU. But why did Green allow this to become a political issue? Cllr. Mel Kositsky, Steve Ferguson, Kim Richter and others took the high road to provide a compromise solutions that if approved by TransLink would be a Win-Win for all. It's because Mayor Green simply wants attention, attachments to issues and a fan club. He is incapable of providing intelligent solutions as witnessed with 208th Street and many other issues before Council.

Today Mayor Green was guest on CBC Radio's "On The Coast" radio show. The topic of discussion? 208th Street. Mayor Green spouted off about not wanting a truck route and suggested on this show that the developers will bear the costs of upgrading 208th Street. Green had better read the Community Charter and provincial laws before suggesting that Developer Cost Charges (DCC's) will pay for this costly endeavor.

Besides the costly upgrading of the 208th and Highway 1 overpass ($up to $30M?), land must be secured along 208th for lane widening. Despite popular belief, developments along 208th that provided dedications are not adequate for the upgrading. This project could cost well over $100M when completed. Green simply doesn't get this.

The CBC Radio host did and Green was grilled about the costs of upgrades and who would pay. As per his usual, Green spouted off some vague, bull-confident statements about no truck and getting road upgrades despite that. Nothing in the way of concrete plans or intelligent recommendations.

Read the last post here and you will see the pattern emerging. Rick Green is simply not mayor material and the man is scratching to get his head around the real issues apart from politicking and running a campaign. It is high time that this mayor cease trying to paint himself as the victim (that's like beating a dead horse now) and get on with putting forth smart solutions to the Township's growing complexity and issues. Stop the politicking and get on with doing what you were elected to do Mayor Rick Green. Stop blaming everyone else for your inadequacies and failures. And they are many.

Issues Without Solutions

Langley politics is a strange mix of good and evil. Manipulation is at ever turn and lately residents seem to feel a conspiracy exists at every turn. Why are so many of our residents negative and angry?

Attend any public session or delegation to Township Council and one will hear the accusations and innuendos. As one recent blog commentator suggested, much of the talk is directed at Township staff and is very disrespectful. People tend to think they know more than the well-qualified engineers and true experts. Why is that?

Former Township Mayor Kurt Alberts had a slogan... "Working Together". Mr. Alberts did nothing short of that when he opened communications with the federal and provincial governments. He lived out "Working Together" when citizens contacted him about concerns. There was respectful discussions and sometimes respectful disagreements. Not everyone may have left Mayor Alberts office 100% satisfied, but they were shown respect and most returned that respect. At the Council table, Mayor Alberts showed that spirit of Working Together with his fellow councillors. One, two or more might have disagreed with Alberts on one issue or another, but there was much mutual respect across the table. Cllr. Kim Richter disagreed often with Alberts, but Mayor Alberts treated Richter with respect at all times. It was all a part of his Working Together philosophy.

Mayor Rick Green on the other hand talks often about "fighting" other orders of government and others. He has managed to set a precedent for disrespecting staff at every turn. During the Mufford Overpass debates, Green routinely questioned staff's integrity and expertise of several members of Township staff. It was obvious after his first two months in office that Green would not be Working Together with anyone other than insiders with vested interests.

One particular local newspaper editor gives lip service to peace, harmony and cooperation. Yet he helped get this "fighter" elected! Now how hypocritical was that? And now that Mayor Green's true colours are out, this local editor continues to polish the brass knob in an attempt to make it look better and more appealing.

Our Township community is now more divided than it ever was. Extremely qualified staff are abused with accusations and loud arguments. Staff did not sign up for combat duty and these are fine people with impeccable qualifications. Working Together has sadly given way to Every Man for Himself. For his part, Mayor Green continues to gather with groups opposed to something. People that have some issue in the Township. He strokes their egos and puts down the expert data to win their trust.

Green very manipulatively never brings about any intelligent solutions that could resolve these people's problems. Though he has access to all the expert reports, and within them many times contain room for good compromise solutions. Certainly never any MIDDLE GROUND is offered by Mayor Green. He simply vows to "fight" and then allows the fallout to hit fellow councillors and staff.

Much of Council have to "wear" Green's shrapnel. Wise Township residents see that its all fodder for the next election. One which Green has already announced his candidacy for. Green's pals in the media can't help but invoke his name and write stories about the big bad Township Council members who just can't work with this mayor. They gush with praises for this rookie mayor that has managed to alienate all but a few. The fact that Mayor Rick Green cannot get along with Cllrs. Ferguson, Fox, Kositsky, Long, Bateman, Richter and Ward should clue these media types and others in on a fatal flaw here. Can all these councillors be big and bad? When all of them at one time or another Worked Together with former Mayor Alberts for the good of our community, one has to question what Mayor Green is doing behind the scenes.

Our fellow Township residents should really examine this pattern of political maneuvering by Mayor Rick Green. Watch the media comments. Watch the public meetings that turn into a circus sideshow because he can't chair a meeting. Listen to the soundbites. Watch him appear in the driveways of those with issues. Listen for any hint of wise solutions that should come from someone holding the office of the mayor. You certainly won't find any intelligent middle ground coming from this mayor who wishes to FIGHT everyone. You will find strife, division and and personality conflicts that come from a divisive agenda that is the hallmark of Mayor Green's administration. An agenda that was clearly evident during his campaign with an issue here and another issue there.

It's very interesting that the day after the election, Mayor-Elect Rick Green removed his website from the Internet, including all of the sound bites and promises. Cllrs. Richter and Bateman have maintained their websites on a consistent basis. Their promises and statements are there for all to see. Yet if you go to this link of Green's campaign website, you will not be able to connect. It simply vanished from the face of the internet the very next day after Rick Green was elected Mayor of the Township of Langley. Now why is that?

When One Seeks To Undermine

IN OUR OPINION

Over the past few weeks are Editorial Board has been receiving information about various discussions and tactics Mayor Green has been employing in our community. You will recall that during the campaign season, candidate Rick Green was very busy holding meetings in the community to find issues to attach himself to. Once elected, he immediately attached himself to more things such as Fill Sites, the Hopington Aquifer, the 64th Avenue Overpass and more.

Since the election Township Council has allowed him to hold Mayor's Drop-In Forums as a courtesy. When first proposed by the mayor, some council members questioned the purpose of these forums. After reviewing some of the official Township recordings of those council meetings, we discovered that Cllr. Kim Richter specifically questioned the mayor as to how these meetings would be used, and if he (Mayor Green) intended to start addressing issues without council participation (paraphrase). The mayor responded that he wouldn't.

Since the Mayor's Forums began, we hear that many issues are being discussed, and solutions offered and all without council's awareness or consent. Although other requests for information are pending, we are finding that considerable Township resources are being tied up or used to research issues brought to Mayor Green. Many of these same issues coming from disgruntled community members have been addressed by staff in the past. Yet more resources are being wasted so that Mayor Green appears (to the public) to be "working on them". At a recent Drop-In Forum held in Willoughby it has been reported to us that the mayor was annoyed at the presence of three council members. Several sources tell us that the mayor raised his voice to some or all of the councillor and said publicly that this was HIS MEETING.

In another instance we were invited to meet with a Township resident that had some concerns with the mayor. In this meeting we were told that Mayor Green actually visited this resident personally to address Bylaw issue(s). The mayor failed to notify official Township Bylaw staff who had discussed the matter with the homeowner previously. The mayor appeared at the home and in a bullyish and rude manner. The mayor ordered the resident to cease certain activities.

Our elected officials in Canada are not elected to become self-appointed US-style Sheriffs that roam the county. Municipalities in Canada are civil and contract the RCMP, local police or Bylaw Officers to address matters related to the Criminal Code or Bylaw infractions. Just like an ordinary citizen that is overzealous, an elected official acting like this can ruin a criminal or Bylaw case. In a much similar Sheriff fashion, Mayor Green demanded in the past that the Langley RCMP notify him of any gang incidents so that he could appear at the crime scene with news cameras rolling to assure all Township residents that he was on the job and would see to it that these incidents wouldn't occur in our community.

Never in anyone's recent memories can long-term knowledgeable Township residents recall a mayor do the things that this man does. Behind-the-scenes meetings, consensus building bullying and other tactics are being used to the detriment of Township Council. Promises to residents concerned with a host of issues are being made personal promises by the mayor that he will single handedly resolve their issues. All of this is occurring for the most part without the knowledge or crescent of Township Council.

The Mayor's Report used to be a time in the council meeting where the mayor would report to council on what meetings or events that he or those acting in his stead, have participated in since the last meeting. Since taking office however, Mayor Green turned the docile Mayor's Report into at times a political spear hurled at council members, or to promote initiatives in his political agenda.

It is now common knowledge that several letters have been sent out from the Mayor's Office on letterhead that includes the names of ALL Council members. Yet as Cllrs. Fox and Richter pointed out recently, Mayor Green did not make council aware of these letters nor seek their consent to send them!

We also have the incident where Mayor Green attended the Township's Heritage Committee meeting. He did so to get them to add a Mayoral Chain of Office with their work plan so that he would have the jewels before the next election. At that time Cllrs. Bateman and Richter caught that line item in the committee's minutes and had the chain removed.

Shame on Mayor Green for using Township citizen committees, external boards and meetings sanctioned by the good graces of Township Council to further the mayor's re-election campaign. A campaign that he recently launched some 20+ months ahead of the next election.

In our opinion it is now time for Township Council to review the Mayor's Drop-In Forum and other activities and take some control. There are plenty of avenues for public input and participation that will at the same time, respect council and be inclusive. In our opinion these behind-the-scenes politicking excursions by Mayor Green are dangerously excluding council oversight.

Mayor Searches for Another Cause

Our Editorial Board received info from our stringers regarding last night's Township of Langley Council meeting. It is very clear that Mayor Green is in search of causes to keep his political career alive.

We will expound on them move at a later time, but it appears that Green has taken a swipe at Parklane Homes for their Bedford Landing development. A development that has been very good at working with local residents and people who use the waterways. Despite all the good intentions they are not respected by a group of people that just cannot be pleased with anything this developer does.

As we previously blogged, Parklane has done so much and now Mayor Green bitch slapped them in last night's meeting in poor attempt to garner public support. What's more, Green suggested that a public hearing be moved from the Township facility at OUR expense, so this hearing could be done in Fort Langley. Public hearings come up all the time and involve neighbourhoods all over Langley. Should these meetings now become traveling circus shows to pander to voters? The Town Hall expenses are already covered. Why should taxpayers pony up more for sound equipment, facility rental, etc.??

Mayor Green voted against the budget and now he is wanting to eat off the buffet without paying for it once again. What will it take for this man to realize one has to approve a budget in order to spend the money? When will this man stop grabbing at straws hunting out issues in the community to attach himself to? This was his campaign strategy and now he continues to do this while in office. He was elected to serve and not to continue a political campaign.

Time to stop politicking and work! Enough with the vote pandering!

Another Green Flip-Flop At Metro Vancouver

In today's Langley Advance hidden away online is this Letter to the Editor from Donna Passmore, a very vocal environmentalist in the region. Passmore rightly points out that Mayor Rick Green appears to switch his votes and ideas when he feels he is away from the local spotlight.

You may recall that previously the Langley Record has brought to light several inconsistent votes by Mayor Rick Green at Metro Vancouver meetings. The last Green flip-flop occurred when Metro Board members voted themselves a huge pay increase. However, before entering this meeting Mayor Green spoke against the pay raise and then entered the meeting and voted FOR it.

"On March 26, barely more than a year after the board (in pre-election mode) voted to keep Maple Ridge's historic Jackson Farm in the Metro Vancouver Green Zone, Maple Ridge put it back on the agenda."

"Mayor Rick Green of Langley Township (who ran on a platform of preserving farmland) and Gayle Martin of Langley City both voted in favour of developing this historic farmland."

-- Donna Passmore, Farmland Defence League of BC

While we have never heard any promises from Cllr. Martin of the City of Langley, we all know that Mayor Rick Green of the Township of Langley has been very vocal with regards to "saving farmlands". We heard much of this talk during the 2008 election campaign and of course Green's extensive musings during the Mufford/64th overpass debates. Green had vowed to "FIGHT" because he said he was "for farmers and farmlands.

The Langley Record also recently discovered that Mayor Green had an extensive voting record in Delta in the 1980's (where he was a councillor), voting in favour of development over farmlands preservation.

Trees at 208th Street Near 52A Avenue

A reader posted these comments under an old post and we thought we would bring her concerns front and center for all to see, instead of leaving it hidden in the March 25th subject post. As many know, there is a Tree Bylaw in the Township of Langley and we are not certain there is one in the City of Langley as we did not find anything on the website. Perhaps a Langley City Council member or someone in the know can respond to Melissa here.


Melissa Jerome has left a new comment on your post "When You Can't Have It Both Ways":

Today (May 11) at around 8:11 am, I was in traffic on 208th street near 52a Avenue when I looked to the left side of the road. As always, there was construction, but what caught my eye made me want to scream.

Years and years ago, my friend Semantha died a very tragic death and in her room there was a little potted tree. We planted this tree along the road she used to live, all 31 of her friends and myself included. This tree has stood for years and served as a private memorial to Semantha for us, even though it is just a tree. She loved that little plant and cherished it when she lived because it made her think of Christmas and happiness.

Not today.

The claws came down on our tree with ruthless speed and ripped it out of the hole we dug for it so many years ago, chucking it into the chipper. I started to cry and screamed something at them, but they didn't even look at me. That tree meant the world to us. It meant that she was always with us, through good times and bad. That tree has served more than once as a comfort, and now it is gone forever.

There was another identical tree beside it that was a bud off of the first, and that was gone by the time I saw the original one die.

Have these construction companies no mercy? This was OUR TREE. I don't care about billion dollar road deals, this tree was supposed to stand forever. We are all outraged at the fact that they would let the only greenery along this road that meant more than shade - two cone-shaped pine trees, no higher than an average man - die for the polluters of the earth.

I want answers. Why were these trees, and others along 208th, taken down, and why, when it was common sense to many people, did they tear down this memorial to our friend? This is getting to be like Avatar. All they want is a paycheck. All we wanted was for them to leave our trees alone.

Yesterday's Township Council Meetings

Our Editorial Board has now drank copious amounts of coffee with our Township Council stringers and here is what we can report on yesterday's Special Meeting of Council at 3:00pm and the Public Hearing Meeting at 7:00pm.

Apparently Mayor Green was absent for a family emergency and Cllr. Kim Richter served as Chair for the meetings. We hear that she did a good job as chair and appeared to be more diplomatic. Our stringers opined that perhaps the power of the Chair worked some magic. This is a good thing and it's too bad it is not the way she conducts herself at every meeting of Council.

Cllr. Richter did allow last night's public hearing participants to "cross-examine" staff which was totally inappropriate. All reports and information are in the ToL website and the public hearing is for SUBMISSIONS from the public - not cross-examination. The Chair also allowed members of the public to speak more than once, which is also inappropriate. We give her a B-.

From the two agendas there were only two issues that raised Council concern and vocal opposition. One related to the Mayor-supported Langley Airport Authority. Council felt that they already form that layer of oversight above the airport manager, therefore no further bureaucracy is required. Cllr. Ward (who is a pilot) declared that he's not willing to fix what Isn't broken. The idea burned down in defeat with a tied vote 4-4.

The other larger bone of contention came as Cllr. Richter presented a motion accusing Council of receiving a 55% pay increase (not really fact). She proposed that the current bench-marked averaging system (that was designed by an expert citizen's committee) be scrapped and replaced with Council reviewing and voting on pay increases. Several Council members spoke against "politicizing" the process and basically Richter's grandstand approach. Cllr. Ferguson pointed out that Cllr. Richter wasn't being much of a team player and this was "very disturbing" to him. We will reserve further commentary on this motion, as all members of Council addressed the issue well.

It is becoming increasingly evident that both Cllrs. Bob Long and Mel Kositsky are getting sick and tired of the folly at Council. Both are becoming more vocal with clear and concise opposition. We notice they are also moving away from more referrals of items to staff and that's a great thing. After all, Council is there to make decisions!

Overall a tame Council meeting and public hearing. Cllr. Richter did a good job of running the meeting and getting along with her Council colleagues for the most part.

Langley Record Investigative Exclusive

Our Editorial Board has been extremely busy visiting various offices in Langley, Delta, Surrey and Vancouver to bring you the very best in investigative journalism. After all, with one newspaper in Rick Green's pocket by his own admission, you can't expect much from the local rags that are barely keeping their heads above water. One in particular that won't send their editor packing despite that editor losing touch with all reality and failing to understand today's Langley Township.

(THIS SECTION REMOVED BASED ON ACTION BY OUR LEGAL COUNSEL)

Be watching this space as the news unfolds.

So Much For Openness and Transparency

At yesterday's Township Council, Cllr. Kim Richter announced a Notice of Motion that would require Township staff to advise her and other members of council of all Freedom of Information (FoI) requests from the general public. Council would receive copies of requested documents and more. This is a huge departure from her "openness and Transparency" double-speak election platforms. It is clearly a knee-jerk reaction from Richter in her futile attempt to target this blog.

Richter's folly has far reaching implications and legal challenges ahead. Imagine a Township staff member who files an FoI request in a whistle blower case? Now all of council will receive the details of this staffer's request and exposes that person to possible action or dismissal. WOW, we do hope the local CUPE and other unions are paying attention to this latest Richter silliness. Yes, the same Kim Richter who last year was championing a Whistle Blower Policy for the Township, now this week seeks to rally her uniformed troops together with desk lamps and magnifiers to snuff out freedom and liberty for the general public.

When our Editorial Board caught wind of this nonsense this morning, we immediately tasked our legal council to check on the legality of this nonsensical motion and to alert provincial officials of this attempt to is regulate their domain and usurp Provincial Privacy Legislation.

As the original FoI that reached the Langley Record through unconventional means involved Mayor Green and not Cllr. Richter, this has set off new alarm bells here at The Langley Record. Does Township Councillor Kim Richter have something to hide? Something so damaging that she must try to stifle or frustrate our rights and freedoms?

We had obtained election disclosures some time ago and was going to publish several years of Cllr. Richter's disclosure documents. Quite simply, Cllr. Kim Richter is not worth much of our time. But stay tuned as The Langley Record digs deep to uncover more news in a Langley Record Exclusive Investigation forthcoming. News that the local media deny you each and every week.

Local Press Part of Problem, Not Solution

OPINION

This week Editor Frank Bucholtz of The Langley Times too yet another opportunity to back his buddy, Township Mayor Rick Green. This is the same editor that announced in his Opinion piece back in 2008 that Township voters should really pay more attention to local property tax issues. Throwing former Mayor Kurt Alberts under the bus just days before the municipal election.

Well Mr. Bucholtz your latest rant and other press focus on the fireworks as you see them and the sensation headlines. Truth is, you haven't graced Council Chambers for much of anything, but you appear in the press to speak with authority.

The fact is, Cllr. Grant Ward spoke against wasteful 1/4 page advertising for Mayor's Forums, when a Council meeting notice garners a few inches and is much more important. So while Editor Bucholtz is so concerned about local property taxes, he is willing to white wash Mayor Green's story. Why on earth would the good editor fight a larger Township ad in his newspaper? Don't they make more money from the larger ad with Green's smiling mug? AND Bucholtz must have been really livid when some councillors suggested putting the discretionary ads out to tender and giving that to the lowest bidder.

The budget and taxes is an important issue and is as important as the other issues The Times listed. The Times fails to remind readers that Green was elected to cut the budget and do all kinds of new things, all part and parcel of his election platform. The headlines that this week's Times and Advance ran certainly got the attention of lots of readers. But they failed to address the real issues and that was that Mayor Green had direct say into the ad's content, design and size. He also authorized the expensive 14 months of such advertising, all while voting against the budget and booming his rhetoric about why he couldn't vote for the budget. Well Mayor Green, those budgets you voted against were the ones that paid for your advertising bills. Advertising with a campaign picture certainly geared to boost your position for the next election that two years ahead you have already announced your candidacy for.

The local press should really start providing balanced coverage of factual events. Their attitude and coverage impacts this community and all of the whining that has resulted from Mayor Rick Green's administration. Green is very good at painting himself as a victim along with his cohorts. But Green is directly responsible for the division in the Township of Langley and for his lack of any concrete results. Time to call a spade a spade. Editor Bucholtz and others need to consider the welfare of our community over advertising sales, hypocrisy and sensationalism.

You Be The Judge

“On the Freedom of Information that you talked about, there was a description…ah.. and I believe it said drop-in - the words drop-in was circled or squared or something and I said larger. That is correct, the words were larger. I did not have anything to do with the size of the ad.” --Mayor Green

You see the document for yourself above (click to enlarge). The Langley Advance (click) reports the entire ad was circled and The Langley Times (click) also reports the entire ad was circled. You be the judge.

Truth or Consequences?

A LANGLEY RECORD INVESTIGATIVE EXCLUSIVE

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 Kicker

Richter pointed out the wastefulness of this ad. In our opinion this is especially true given the fact that Council Meeting ads (required by law) are MUCH smaller and more important. Richter rightly questioned why Mayor Green's forum ads had to be so large?

You 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!