New tools against bias.

I would like to thank the Township of Langley Councillors for raising awareness of influence and bias over the last three years.  As a result of this awareness township residents have formed new tools to keep our leaders honest.  Over the next four years we are sure to use these tools.

I personally look forward to each newly elected Councillor's declaration of campaign contributions to see how they will be swayed as politicians by outside influences and as a clarifying guide to their character.

Congratulations to the TOL Mayor and Counsel.  We trust you will use a more down to earth approach over the upcoming term during which all of you, I'm sure, will listen to and be more inclusive of the people who matter the most: the voters (actual people, not business voting entities) and residents of Langley.

They deserve your full attention and your full regard.

-D Chambers

Crime stats ‘just plain incorrect,' says Langley City mayor

So much for rolling up your sleeves and seriously doing something about it.  True or false a politician's denial always works.  Or in the case of Langley City (as well as the spill over to adjacent areas) does it?

http://www.langleytimes.com/news/183870361.html

• by Monique Tamminga - Langley Times
• posted Dec 17, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Langley City Mayor Peter Fassbender says statistics released this month designating his town as the crime capital of Metro Vancouver are “misleading and just plain incorrect.”

“These statistics that were generated have no relevance to what’s happening on the streets of Langley City,” said Fassbender. Crime has actually gone down year after year.

“This was an academic exercise used by the Vancouver Police to say ‘Gee, we’re not the worst, someone else is.’”

The report Fassbender is referring to is the The Crime Severity Index put out by Statistics Canada. The CSI was introduced in 2009 to measure not just the volume, but also the seriousness of crime.

In the report, it showed that Langley City had two murders in 2011. In fact, one took place in the Township and the other was on Kwantlen First Nation land.

Kwantlen elder George Antone, 71, was killed on the reserve on McMillan Island.

During Christmas, 38-year-old Jeremy Bettan was shot dead while standing in his Walnut Grove driveway.

That shooting was gang-related, said police.

No arrests have been made in either case.

But putting two murders in a city of 27,000 shot Langley City way higher in the standings for violent crimes, putting it well above towns like Abbotsford, Coquitlam and the Township.

“They don’t even verify their own facts, that makes it frustrating,” said Fassbender about incorrectly attributing the two homicides as being within the City borders.

The CSI ratings are reached by looking at a community’s crime stats and assigning point values to each type of crime. For instance, homicide is considered to be the most serious of crimes and has a point value of 7,042, whereas a B&E is 187 points and a theft under $5,000 is 37 points. So one homicide is equal to 38 B&Es or 190 thefts, pointed out Langley RCMP Supt. Derek Cooke.

In a letter he forwarded to The Times, he said he was “surprised” Langley City was cited as worst for crime and decided to look into the CSI further to understand where the numbers came from.

To get the real truth, Fassbender and Cooke ask residents to look to the quarterly crime reports provided by Cooke at council meetings. These also appear on the Langley RCMP website.

“I can say without hesitation that our police are doing a very good job,” said Fassbender.

Part of being effective is making arrests, which will boost the amount of crime being recorded.

“If you catch the bad guys you are filing a charge which will then show up on the crime index,” he said.

“At the end of the day what our citizens need to know, is our community safe? Yes.”

He contends City life isn’t perfect, but defies anyone to find a community that is.

“Yes, we have drug deals and break and enters and an increase in theft from auto, but show me any community that doesn’t?”

He wants residents to share in the responsibility of keeping the community safe by continuing to be the eyes and ears of police and to not leave items in a car that attract thieves.

Nearly a decade ago, Langley City claimed the notorious title of being the car theft capital of North America. How those statistics were arrived upon also could have been population-based, but it did begin a large campaign to go after career car thieves and increase Bait Car tactics.

Gloucester Indutrial Estates

Does the bate-and-switch continue?

Gloucester Industrial Estates - Acres of land converted from "golf course" to "industrial" with a promise of amenities that never materialized.

Monday, October 27, 2014
Regular Evening Meeting 7:00pm
Location: Fraser River Presentation Theatre
20338 65 Avenue

Name recognition on a voting ballot doesn't mean public approbation..

Question: How do you become a politician without acting like a politician?

OPEN LETTER TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL

http://mclellanpark.blogspot.ca/2014/10/open-letter-to-mayor-and-council.html

An Open Letter to Mayor and Council

October 7,2014

Dear Mayor and Council,

On March 20, the Langley Times reported that Township staff were preparing a report for Township Council identifying Township-owned properties that could be sold to pay for future infrastructure in Langley Township. We the undersigned, are concerned about the implications  of this article. Six months have passed without this staff report being made public. We write to you with the assumption that it has not yet been presented to Council.

As the article acknowledges, past and present policy with regard to the sale of what the Township has identified as “surplus property” has generated much controversy. The approach that the Township has taken appears to many to be secretive and reactive. There is an obvious need for a process with greater transparency, one grounded in sound planning.

The lands belonging to the Township are the collective property of the community of Langley. Decisions regarding the management of 'surplus properties' greatly impact the public good and will affect the patterns of future development in the neighbourhoods in which they are located. Decisions regarding the sale or retention of these lands  must take a long-term view. We are particularly concerned that the ecological value of  'surplus properties'  be given greater consideration.

Under the current approach, it appears that the Township has proceeded without adequately considering or  informing itself about the ecology of parcels placed on the market. It has therefore been left to individual citizens and community groups to bring these issues to the attention of Council and Staff. In response to protest Township has made ad hoc corrections that have failed to address the larger problem. The danger that significant ecosystems could be lost remains. 

Although heartened by the implication that the above mentioned staff report will be released to the public upon receipt by Council, there are a number of additional steps that we feel Mayor and Council can undertake.

1) Council should direct Staff to undertake consultations with stewardship groups and other environmental and community groups to assist in the preparation of thestaff report. Upon completion of the staff report, it should be presented to Council and released to the public at the same time. We urge Council to authorize this action in a timely manner and to see that the completion of the report is not delayed.

2) Develop a comprehensive inventory of Township lands that would be publicly accessible on the web. In time this could include the results of ecological surveys of individual properties that have been prepared by public or private entities.

3)  Prepare a comprehensive plan for the sale and retention of Township lands that takes into account the ecological value of particular parcels. The impact on Langley aquifers from any resulting destruction of forests and wetlands must be considered.The Township should  commit itself to the principle that our natural heritage should not be sacrificed in the development of modern amenities.

 4) Council has made it a uniform practice to invoke Section 90 of the Community Charter as a way of closing meetings of Council to the public when land sales are under consideration. The resulting lack of transparency compounds the difficulties in the issues already discussed. When a sale is well-advised, this practice hinders maximum advertising to prospective buyers, and when a sale is ill-advised it prevents the public from seeing their elected representatives debate the proposal. The public interest is thus served by greater transparency in both instances.Only exceptional circumstances can justify invoking Section 90 in the circumstance  of land sales. We strongly urge Council to invoke Section 90 sparingly in the case of land sales and on a case by case basis.

5)The comprehensive plan should recognize that although a policy of selling off real estate to generate capital can have merit in some circumstances care must be taken that land worth more monetarily in the future could be lost through poor planning. Holding on to 'surplus properties' may also provide a much needed source of income in the future.

Finally, we urge Council to take these steps in a timely manner so that the ensuing discussion and debate on Council and amongst the public can begin before, and not after, the upcoming municipal election this November. We would encourage Council and staff to begin the  process by meeting with community groups prior to November 1st. We would be pleased to participate in such a meeting.  

Respectfully,

Watchers of Langley Forests

Salmon River Enhancement Society

*Both groups have reviewed this letter and being convinced that the issue  is an important one that should be addressed they have joined together to send this letter.

21-year saga ends as Murrayville subdivision approved - Langley Times

Froese: time to “see that this chapter is closed and we move on.” But move onto what? What is the true vision of Langley? Tailor-made developer paid for and directed planning? Overcrowding? Future slums? A future where we have to pump water from other locals and we can't feed ourselves from local farms when there are severe droughts in other areas of the world such as California?

Btw, there is no such thing as "unfarmable" as long as you have good soil, half decently level land, water and sunlight - we aren't in the mountains here.

'Now Money' trumps everything, even politicians.

21-year saga ends as Murrayville subdivision approved - Langley Times

Councillor David Davis argued against giving final approval to a project that permits house construction on agricultural land in return for creating a buffer between the urban and rural zones.

— Image Credit: Dan Ferguson/Langley Times

• 26
•  
•  

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
•                             

• by  Dan Ferguson - Langley Times
• posted Sep 11, 2014 at 8:00 AM— updated Sep 11, 2014 at 4:23 PM

A debate over development of an 11-acre Murrayville farm site came to an end Monday with its final approval by Langley Township council, 21 years after the owners first applied to build housing on two agricultural properties near 216 Street and 44 Avenue.

The matter ended up in court when the regional Metro Vancouver authority said the proposal, known as the “Hendricks et al” development, violated regional growth strategy limits and sued the Township.

Metro also sued Langley over two other housing developments it said were beyond the power of the municipality to approve; the University District and the Wall farm projects near Trinity Western.

In March of this year, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Neena Sharma dismissed the Metro lawsuit and upheld the approval of all three projects.

Sharma said the Metro regional growth strategy, which aims to control urban growth, was only guidelines expressing policy, not enforceable laws.

That cleared the way for final approval of the Hendricks development, 21 residential lots with a 15-metre landscape “buffer” to be built between the new homes and the protected farmland to the south.

The Hendricks et al properties used to be part of the protected land within the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR), but the provincial agency in charge of the ALR, the Agricultural Land Commission, approved its exclusion after several applications by the owners in 1993, 2003 and 2009.

At the Monday evening Township council meeting, there was one last debate before the vote.

Councillors Michelle Sparrow and David Davis were the only voices raised against the proposal.

“This just sets a precedent, and shows that that if you try hard enough and ask enough times and spend enough money, that eventually you will be able to develop your agricultural lands,” Sparrow said.

Davis said the Township could lose “thousands of acres” of farmland if more buffers are allowed.

“Stop cutting farmland out,” Davis said.

Councillor Charlie Fox was among the majority who voted for the proposal, saying the land, a former horse training facility, was “unfarmable” in part because it is located next to an urban residential neighbourhood.

Councillor Kim Richter said the “agricultural quality of the land is not high” and pending changes to provincial agricultural laws make buffers “absolutely critical” to reduce conflict between urban residents and farmers.

Councillor Bev Dornan said the site was a “perfect spot” for a buffer that would protect both the rural and urban communities.

Councillor Steve Ferguson said he was “looking forward to this thing finally being resolved” after so much time.

Mayor Jack Froese said it was time to “see that this chapter is closed and we move on.”

However, there will be at least one more round of legal wrangling.

In April, Metro Vancouver applied to the B.C. Court of Appeal to overturn the Supremo Court decisions on the Hendricks, University District and Wall developments.

The hearing of the Metro court challenge is scheduled for Dec. 8, 9 and 10 at the Court of Appeal in Vancouver.

Dear local politicians, please, PLEASE don't wait.

Drugs in a community isn't a problem, it's a cancer.  You can't take a 'wait and see' approach on this.  For once rooted it becomes harder and harder to deal with.  The time to act IS NOW.

I can't stress this enough.  The health of our community is a stake.  It is fairly inexpensive to regulate things and take action against the problem now.  Look all you want at the downfalls of other nice communities (like Newton), but act immediately in the best interests of this one.

The rash of property crime in the area and the influx of Methadone dispensaries are the first red flags, don't turn them into the nails of a community coffin.

First item:  Drugs and druggies are being attracted to Langley.  Why?

Let's find an innovative solution.

WELL! This is going to help our community!

Do you ever wonder if we as a society like to 'stick-it-to-ourselves' as much as the hypes do?  "This is a provincial issue" but a local problem, let's act quickly on this so it doesn't become a problem!  Quite obviously Safeway is dispensing methadone by the number of seedy looking people loitering around the place.

DLBA raises alarm over number of pharmacies in Langley City

 http://www.langleytimes.com/news/268025411.html

• by  Monique Tamminga - Langley Times
• posted Jul 21, 2014 at 5:00 PM

During the past six months, the number of pharmacies in the City of Langley has reportedly climbed from three to 12, with another one on the way.

In a city of four-square miles, the proliferation of drug stores in the downtown core is raising alarm bells, with some speculating that many are methadone maintenance clinics, calling themselves pharmacies.

At their July 7 meeting, Langley City council members, including Teri James, who is also the executive director of the Downtown Langley Business Association, received a letter from DLBA members, signed by the association’s chairperson, Sonya Perkins, asking that council consider regulating pharmacies.

The letter states that many downtown business owners have witnessed the dispensing of methadone in several of these new pharmacies and most believe that is why so many have come to the City.

They feel it’s a trend that isn’t going to stop.

Dispensing methadone can be a lucrative business for pharmacies. A methadone prescription is given to heroin addicts who replace that drug with liquid methadone.

Most people using methadone take it daily, and for each time they take it the pharmacy can make around $20 per methadone user.

From the government, through PharmaCare, a pharmacy recieves a dispensing fee plus a fee for watching the person ingest it.

According to a 2011-12 report from the Provincial Health Officer, the number of pharmacies dispensing methadone has more than doubled in B.C. since 2001-02  — when the government made changes to PharmaCare coverage of methadone.

In their letter, the DLBA expresses fears that Langley City will become a hub for methadone dispensing in the Lower Mainland.

They recognize the need for methadone treatment as a vital service in the community, but believe there are already more than enough in place to serve the City’s needs, the letter reads.

James made a motion to draft appropriate zoning bylaw/business licences to regulate or restrict pharmacies in the City.

The DLBA said with so many methadone clinics it is likely the City will continue to see an increase in loitering, drug use as well as a growing homeless population and illegal drug activity.

The City just approved spending almost $90,000 to beef up security at Innes Corners plaza because the amount of drug dealing and buying has grown out of control. James told council she was recently approached to buy drugs in the plaza in the middle of the day.

“I will support the motion, but I disagree with the numbers,” said City councillor Rosemary Wallace at the meeting.

“It bothers me that we have to get to this place (where we are) making this motion.”

Rather than simply try to push people out of the City, she said, government should be trying to fix the root problem.

“This is a provincial issue. We need prevention. Until we find a way to help people, we’re not going to get anywhere.”

The Downtown Surrey BIA has recently been experiencing the same sharp increase in these types of pharmacies popping up in their downtown core.

They are also currently working with their mayor and council to regulate pharmacies. In downtown Whalley there are around 20 pharmacies, many of those dispensing methadone.

Langley RCMP Const. Craig van Herk said he remembers working in Surrey when the number of pharmacies in Whalley climbed from two to 12. Along with the increase in pharmacies, came an increase in the number of pawn shops, he said.

In a later interview, acting mayor Ted Schaffer said he didn’t really notice how many pharmacies had popped up in the City until this was brought to his attention.

“As a council we are looking to get more information, to see what the issues are, to speak further with the DLBA and the B.C. College of Pharmacies,” said Schaffer.

“Not only as a council, but as a community, you want to make sure there is an issue. Is there more than there should be? What is the right number?”

As acting mayor he said he hasn’t had a single call or comment about the growing number of pharmacies, but he gets plenty of comments and concerns from the public about crime.

“Crime is high on people’s mind, and as a council we are trying hard to make sure this is a safe place for people to live and move to,” said Schaffer.

To that end, the City has hired a bylaw officer to work Saturday nights in the downtown core and two retired RCMP officers are contracted to work when needed in the downtown area, in the evenings.

With council meetings adjourning for the summer on July 21, the issues of pharmacies and zoning won’t be addressed until at least September, said Schaffer.

Evi Mustel: West may be best but can cities retain their quality of life?

Personally I think Canadians in their own country are being stepped on by the world and our standard of living is taking a beating with our governments turning a blind eye . 

We as Canadians are being compressed to world standards.  Not a good things considering what we used to have on our own

Canada is becoming an unfriendly place.

http://blogs.theprovince.com/2014/06/26/evi-mustel-west-may-be-best-but-can-cities-retain-their-quality-of-life/

Westerners love where they live and think the future of the Canadian economy lies in the West, not the East. But dig deeper into the data and you find there is a caveat to all this optimism. Westerners also think that there are major challenges that lie ahead for the West’s fast-growing cities,

citing a host of issues that will only be solved by major public and private investment.

Mustel Group took this snapshot of the West’s urban residents for CityAge.org, an international network of city builders. Conducted in partnership with AskingCanadians, the poll shows that 86 per cent believe that Canada’s future economic growth will come primarily from the West.

Partly for this reason, 92 per cent of westerners believe that the quality of life is better in their cities than anywhere else. In addition to the economic benefits of living in the West, city dwellers think the size and density of their communities, the pace of life, friendliness of their cities, their access to recreation and nature and, in B.C., the weather (because it allows for more outdoor play) are key reasons for rating their quality of life as high.

But there is a sense all these positives can’t be taken for granted.

All western cities are facing unprecedented growth and the No. 1 concern by residents is how newcomers will be accommodated. The poll found that the top concern for westerners is urban sprawl, loss of agricultural land and the densification of established neighbourhoods.

The urban West is also concerned about whether their communities can provide the needed infrastructure as their communities grow. In addition to the basics — water, sewer, etc. — there is concern that soft infrastructure such as parks, schools, hospitals and other essential foundations of a healthy city will not keep up with growing demand.

Westerners are worried about transportation infrastructure, and are already frustrated with their current systems, particularly in Vancouver and Calgary where congestion is among the worst in North America.

Other top-level concerns about growth are environmental impacts such as air quality and the increased cost of housing, despite planners and developers assuring the public that more housing will help control prices. There is a growing sense that our economies are not sufficiently diversified as the energy sector comes under increasing scrutiny and that neighbourhoods are becoming disconnected because of growing ethnic enclaves from high levels of immigration.

This snapshot — indicating a high level of contentment but a deep concern that we may not be prepared to deal with major challenges — is a good guide for our political leaders in the years ahead.

At the root of many of these concerns is a frustration that city residents are not being engaged, consulted and included in decision-making. Western communities typically do not receive high marks from residents for their community engagement initiatives.

While most really don’t want to see things change, they know change is inevitable and want to have a seat at the table and be included in the planning of their communities. It is time for communities to bring in professional expertise in community engagement, and not solely rely on planners to manage this process. The West can lead this new approach to urban planning.

Evi Mustel is president of
Mustel Group, a Vancouver-based market and opinion research company. Survey partner, AskingCanadians, is an online data-collection firm with access to a research
community of more than 600,000 Canadians.

It's time to build trust again.

There has been a shock in Langley causing mistrust.  Outside influences and tried to take over the minds of OUR politicians making them forget the people they represent, and with much effort we had to remind them.

Things have to change.

Thoughtful regard has to be generated and the building of trust begun again.

Making Money as Procceeds of Unbanization is Fine Dandy for Some, But What About our Aquifer??

Most expensive mayor's race in Langley Township history - We now understand why...

Why spend so much unless it is to derive some personal (financial) benefit? 

Try this:  Put your thumb over their mouths and then look at their eyes, do you trust them now?  They say a person's eyes are windows to their souls.  You can tell something about a person's character by looking into their eyes...  enough said.  :)

http://www.langleytimes.com/news/143821376.html?mobile=true

Most expensive mayor's race in Langley Township history

By FRANK BUCHOLTZ
March 22, 2012 · Updated 9:30 AM
0 Comments

The three candidates for mayor of Langley Township collectively spent more than $240,000 during the campaign which was the most expensive in the municipality's history. / FILE PHOTOS

The 2011 three-way race for the mayor’s chair on Langley Township council was the most expensive mayor’s race in Township history.

Among them, the three candidates spent more than $240,000. That total includes the $87,569 spent by the Vote Langley Now slate put together by incumbent Rick Green, which also ran seven candidates for council. Green’s own campaign cost an additional $8,800. He came third with 4,466 votes

Jack Froese, the newcomer who won the election with 7,706 votes, spent $79,533,  while longtime councillor Mel Kositsky, who finished second with 6,522 votes, spent $70,246.

More details about their campaign contributions will be published in Tuesday’s Times, but all three candidates received a large number of donations from developers, realtors, wealthy individuals and businesses. Both Froese, through his business JD Turkey Farms, and Kositsky also spent a substantial amount of their own funds on their campaigns.

The two most expensive mayor’s campaigns in the past were in 1999 and 2002. In 1999, when incumbent John Scholtens was defeated by Kurt Alberts, it was a four-way race.

Also running for mayor were Steve Ferguson and Heather McMullan. Scholtens and his Langley Leadership Team slate also spent a significant amount in 2002, when he attempted to unseat Alberts.

The LLT also spent a great deal in the 1996 campaign when Scholtens was re-elected for his second term as mayor, but much of that money was used to support candidates for council and school board.

More details about campaign contributions and spending for Langley Township council, Langley City council and the Langley Board of Education appears in other stories on this website.

Developers don't have to tear down all the trees when they build. Unless they make money on the wood...

Has the Township Already Subdivided Your Land without you Knowing About It??

Check with the township and see what they have planned for your property.

You may be surprised.  They have done it before.

Alberts was terrible about doing this sort of thing when he was planning the area.  The property shown just below at 208A St. and 44th Ave. (affectionately known as the Lama Farm) still to this day is all planned-out at the planning department, this without the consent of the property owners who have no wish to sell.  The owners have told me that Developers and the Township Planning Department pestered them until they demanded "What part of NO don't you understand??"  The wife told me that the Township "couldn't wait until I was dead and buried so they went ahead a divided the place up anyway."  You can tell in the photo what they had planned for these people's property just by looking at the housing patterns.  Btw, the trees at the south line of the property are 100 feet tall.

Check it out for yourself, you can find the paperwork at the planning office...