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.