Tim Louis has his facts wrong on the accomplishments made by the current City Council on social housing.

Yesterday, former COPE Councillor Tim Louis wrote an op-ed on City Caucus claiming that the Vision Vancouver led Council has been responsible for no new social housing.

But here are the real facts that Tim failed to mention:

Under the NPA, the city signed a 2007 Memorandum of Understanding with the Province to open 14 sites of social housing.

At the time it was hailed as a landmark agreement, and on paper, it absolutely was.  It was very positive.

Except for one thing…there was absolutely no money attached to the commitment.

Fast forward to 2008, and no construction had started.  Why?  Because as Mayor, Sam Sullivan was unable to secure anything but lip service, and as a result, no provincial money had been set aside.  The social housing sites sat empty.

It wasn’t until March of 2009 that Gregor and Vision got the BC Liberals committed to funding the first six social housing sites in Vancouver, and subsequently in April of 2010, they committed funding to the rest, for a total of $333 million in new money.

MOU’s are great.  They signal inter-governmental cooperation – well, on paper at least.  Just take a look at the Evergreen Line MOU, which sat idle for many years without any commitments for tangible money, and you will see that the road to hell is always paved with the best of intentions.

It takes political will, negotiating, and a strong working relationship to make things actually take shape – something that Sam and his Chief of Staff Daniel Fontaine never seemed to grasp.  Truth be told, there are many within the Vision caucus that were open to a Rich Coleman leadership run because of all the progress he has been able to make with the City of Vancouver on social housing during this Vision Vancouver term.

So Tim Louis’ spin on no new social housing under Gregor Robertson is a sly trick and some great politics, but it really doesn’t reflect the reality of what has actually happened over the past two years in contrast to the previous three to Vision coming to power.

• A great piece by my friend Ian Davey on the power of change being behind the Rob Ford incoming term.   Here is the key quote of relevance to the Vancouver civic political scene: “Governments change when voters decide they are incompetent and/or untrustworthy. Competence is the standard measure of good government and as such is the primary driver of change. Trust is a less tangible measure and untrustworthiness is principally a by-product of incompetent government.”  This is the storyline that the NPA is going to have try and write about Vision Vancouver, and I have a feeling that not only do they not have the individuals necessary to deliver such a message, but they also don’t have a record that lends itself to supporting such a tale.   To the candidates just nominated over the weekend, good luck…you have a long and difficult road ahead of you.

• Solving homelessness is clearly an issue area in which Mayor Gregor Robertson has predicated his entire Mayoralty on, and clearly something that he is in line for scrutiny over.  And to actually house the homeless population, we have a long way to go before we reach his goal of eliminating street homelessness by 2015.  That being said, on nights like the last few, I have to say that these HEAT shelters plus additional emergency shelter beds, which came about as a result of the City showing leadership and the Provincial government coming to the table with vital funding, have been a Godsend.  With an estimated 500 homeless sleeping on the streets of Vancouver, these 612 beds are a good start to keeping people during extreme temperatures.

• While the Vancouver School Board teeters on the verge of having their powers pulled by the Liberal government at any one time, the Vancouver Park Board and the ongoing legacy being built was on full display on Saturday night at COPE’s “Power of the Park Board” event.  The tradition of the Park Board is to set an independent course separate from City Council, and Saturday’s event, and the series of videos produced by Brent Granby, showed how much strength resides in the institution.  With the City facing $20 million in cuts, it will be interesting to see how the current incarnation of the Park Board fares in comparison to other City departments facing cutbacks.

• Speaking of cutbacks, Stuart MacKinnon’s commentary about this being the least progressive Park Board in history reeks of his typical political grandstanding style.  Is instituting fees for toddlers ideal?  Absolutely not.  But what MacKinnon’s fails to mention is that these kinds of fees are common in many neighbouring municipalities, and that Vancouver’s fee structure is still one of the lowest in the region.  Stuart is able to pontificate from the outside because he never has had to deal with the kinds of realities of budgeting that a government has to encounter.  I am predicting that the rumoured $2 million in cuts will be significantly less in the end.  But regardless, to take a position that there should be no more cuts in spite of other vital services feeling the pinch, MacKinnon clearly shows that he is more comfortable sitting and lobbing criticism in opposition than making the tough decisions necessary when you are elected to lead by the people.  If times are tough, then cuts across the board are realistic and responsible.  How the Vision Vancouver caucus manages and fights to mitigate these cuts, however, is the way in which they should be judged on their performance – NOT by adopting ridiculous and unworkable positions as Stuart seems to suggest.

• Gregor Robertson’s commentary on the Olympic Village being put into receivership demonstrates that the City is now in a position of strength to recover the money lent to the Malek brothers, and at the very minimum break even on this project.  Real estate marketing guru Bob Rennie is preaching an approach of patience, while commentators like Bob Ransford – Peter Ladner’s former campaign manager – has written about how the decisions made by former City Manager Judy Rogers were clearly not in the taxpayers’ interest.  This is far from a perfect situation, but Robertson’s vision to take over the financing of the project has now allowed the City to have the maximum amount of control to now roll out the sales and loan recovery in the most prudent and lucrative way possible.  Here is a nugget from a Jeff Lee article over the weekend that is very telling: ”
  The carrying costs to the city are far less than the amounts the now-ousted owners of the former Olympic athletes’ village had to pay, the city said Thursday. That’s because the bank interest rate the city pays is less than half the rate it was charging Millennium Developments.”  Vancouverites should feel a lot more relieved now that there is a little stability being inserted into the mess created by the NPA.

• Melissa De Genova isn’t the only candidate for the Park Board in next year’s election that emerged over the weekend.  Brent Granby, who is the President of the West End Residents Association, also announced that he too will be running.  One only knows if Loretta Woodcock will run for fourth term for COPE (if I was to guess, I would say that scenario is unlikely), but Granby will be a great candidate for the party should they be left without an incumbent next year.

• Not to look a gift horse in the mouth, but is anyone else shocked that being designated a “Cultural Capital” of Canada only carries a federal contribution of $1.75 million?  Regardless, the tours of city institutions that the public doesn’t get to see seems cheap and intriguing, and I am sure that City staff will live up to the legacy they left during the Olympics, which invigourated the civic pride and involvement from residents.  Rest assured, though, that the fun will be had by the City ponying up $7 million to celebrate Vancouver’s 125th birthday, not by the meagre contribution of the federal government.  Sign of  times I guess.

That’s all for now folks.  Enjoy the crisp and frosty air…it is beautiful to breathe in.

With former electeds like Chiavario, Cowie and Rogers, vcaTEAM had a respectable group of candidates back in 2002. The party's Achilles heal was the lack of a viable Mayoral candidate.

Back in 2002, I became involved with a group of municipal activists who had the the notion that the polarized politics of COPE and the NPA could use a dose of moederation, and as a result formed a new party named vcaTEAM.

The tried to take a middle of the road approach.  They had established candidates (Nancy Chiavario and Alan Herbert was were both former NPA Councillors, Art Cowie was a former TEAM Councillor and Liberal MLA, and Stephen Rogers was a six-time Cabinet Minister and former Speaker of the House).  They had a platform that spoke to many of the issues that are topical today (biking corridors, opening up the city to fun, adding social and affordable housing and a push to increase support for alternative forms of transportation other than the car).

At the time the NPA was in total disarray.  Councillor Jennifer Clarke had organized a coup against popular former Mayor Philip Owen, and the party was divided down the middle as a result.

So it sounded like a recipe for potential success – the elements certainly were there.

And then the party introduced their Mayoral candidate very late in the game, and everything changed.

For weeks, the party brass told me that they had lined up an individual who would blow everyone away in terms of profile and capability.  Managing a joint campaign for established stalwarts like Cowie and Rogers, I was excited by the prospect of this mystery figure making us competitive.

Then, the oft-talked about and hyped person was introduced.  It was Valerie Maclean.

Who you might ask?  Well, I had the same reaction at the time.

At the time, Maclean was the face of the Better Business Bureau here in BC, and so from time to time she would pop up on the news warning consumers about a new scam or company to steer clear of.

One supposes that this occasional TV time was why certain members of the recruiting committee were excited, although as an avid news watcher I didn’t know the name or face off hand.

Now Maclean was a very nice and pleasant woman.  And in regards to the issues, she was more than intelligent to speak about them at least on a peripheral basis.

But when facing off against a political pro like Jennifer Clarke or a personality like Larry Campbell, she seemed over-matched.

And ultimately, she did not have the profile that drew people to the party, if nothing else for curiosity sake.  That lack of drawing power, as opposed to a guy like Larry “Da Vinci” Campbell, was a death knell for those running under the vcaTEAM banner.

And this is the fate the the NPA faces within its current situation.

I refer to an uphill battle for two reasons.

First, finding a person with enough profile, cachet and connections to take on Gregor Robertson is not going to be an easy task.

I notice that this evening Global is going to do a puff piece on John Furlong and his potential political future.  I also notice how the biggest anti-Vision Vancouver members of the press gallery put Furlong shaking hands with Robertson as the image for the promo hyping the piece.

The likelihood of someone like that stepping up to the plate – particularly after saying this last week to Gary Mason:

“I’m both moved and flattered by the number of people who are urging me to consider taking a run at the job, but honestly I just don’t think I’m cut out for the sacrifices of a politician’s life.  It seems like there is no bottom to how cruel we can be to each other. I believe very much in people and in service and the power of a compelling vision to bring people together, but I just cannot imagine being effective in an environment that has become so terribly unforgiving and openly hostile.“

Once again – this polling is a powerful deterrent to anyone considering a run, in spite of what the usual suspects of anger have to say.

Why would a Furlong, or a Christy Clark, or a Carole Taylor, or even a Tung Chan for that matter, put their name into the mix of such a tough, uphill battle?

They would give up salary and/or business opportunities, their private time and family lives, and most importantly, put everything they have built in their careers on the line in what can only be considered a huge gamble.

The NPA is downtrodden, and does not add anything to the equation.  Fundraising, political support in the polls and profile would all have to come from the candidate, who would be bequeathing the party with a boost rather than the other way around.

The second reason the NPA faces an uphill battle is that there is no palpable anger against Vision Vancouver like there was in Toronto, for example, to propel a groundswell of support for who will eventually become the face of the party.

Vision Vancouver, much like the administration of David Miller in 2006, is in a good place to repeat their 2008 victory.  The pockets of opposition to bike lanes, as an example, do not constitute an uprising of backlash as the media loves to try and portray.

Changing governments happens when one of two factors comes into play.  Either a) the incumbent is a disaster and there is a growing disdain amongst the electorate (the majority of administration changes can be traced to this) or b) the alternative comes in and captures the public’s imagination (a phenomenon that is far less common, with Nenshi in Calgary becoming the new exception to the rule).

Neither of these factors are in play in the upcoming Vancouver election, which makes me think that no one that is outside of the municipal sphere of self-importance like Suzanne Anton or Ian Robertson will be idiotic enough to risk their reputations on a race like this.

I keep hammering away at this point, but that comes from an acquired understanding of how civic politics in Vancouver’s at-large system works.

The bottom line is that from the Mayoral candidates, all results for Council, Park Board and School Board flow.

And on that front, it seems as though the NPA machine is a little…or maybe A LOT…backed up.

• Apparently Suzanne Anton’s motion from yesterday became a non-issue that got her pretty riled up as a result of a) Councillor Geoff Meggs speaking to the motion and voicing Vision Vancouver caucus support for the release of any and all documents related to the Mayor’s office expenses b) the fact that Anton’s own scrutiny for disclosure both with regards to her own donor list as well as the practices of former Mayor Sam Sullivan’s office is both suspect and selective and c) the requests calling for an investigation into a private contract that has absolutely nothing to do with the City of Vancouver is ridiculous, and was greeted as such.  I certainly hope for the NPA’s sake that future Anton motions have a little more to do with the ideas and policies that the party will try to promote in the lead-up to the next election.

• No more attacks Charlie.  You do what you do, and I am going to continue to do what I do.  But, I would be very interested to sit down one day soon, clear the air, and find out the logic and motivation behind these two blog entries.  Because sincerely, maybe my radar is clearly unaware of what constitutes journalistic quality when it comes to standards, practices and content these days.  A chat over a coffee is definitely something I am open to.

• I think that Jon Ferry makes some very valid points about the conduct of cyclists in Vancouver and the lack of enforcement when it comes to the way in which they conduct themselves on the road.  And as you can see from the column, you aren’t going to get much argument on that front from Councillor Geoff Meggs, who I would say is one of the galvanizing forces when it comes to planning out the biking infrastructure being constructed across the city.  But there is little doubt that giving cyclists safer and less obstructive options when it comes to encountering traffic does indeed lessen tensions between drivers and their two-wheeled counterparts.  And to create and subsequently maintain the kind of peace that this experiment aims to create, cyclists need to understand that they must uphold their end of the bargain.  Because at the end of the day, success for the bike lane trials and the other initiatives designed to make cycling easier and safer for people, will largely hinge upon the way in which people view those that accommodations are being made for.  Now, if the yahoos behind this monthly monstrocity are the people that the public view as the ones we are giving up our streets for, then any hopes for positive public support should be tossed out the window now.

• So the Bloedel Conservatory is saved, while the Stanley Park Farmyard/Petting Zoo is getting axed.  This is strictly a business decision, as the Bloedel has some strong partners with a defined business plan in the form of the Friends of the Bloedel Association and the VanDusen Botanical Garden Association.  It is about time that this attraction gets the proper planning/marketing expertise that it deserves – the kind of support that would make it a self-sustaining entity.   The farmyard, on the other hand, had no expressions of interest come forward from the private sectorto transform the attraction into one that isn’t such a drain on the taxpayer – $250,000 a year.  Although beloved, that kind of a subsidy for the petting zoo could go to some food security programs or community centre improvements that would have much more of a beneficial impact to the community as a whole.

• Rob Ford’s plans for finding savings at City Hall are finally starting to be revealed – albeit reluctantly.  Here’s the question from the above-linked article that struck me the most: ”
  Asked yes or no on several planned projects, including further waterfront redevelopment, his answer was blunt: “We don’t have the money.” That’s refreshing, and it’s true. But is that what Torontonians really want, or do they just like the idea of kicking David Miller in the rear end?”  Because from the budget process that the City of Vancouver went through last year, it can be determined that regardless of who you are, and where you stand in terms of polling and personal popularity, these kinds of cuts to staff, services and programs is not easy to initiate and carry through for a Mayor the size of these two cities.  There are many questions about Rob Ford’s “charm” that will rear their ugly heads quickly as the realities of the job hit him square in the gut after what is looking like an inevitable election win.

• I got some pretty passionate and at time venomous emails from some COPE members over yesterday’s post, which as I read it over again seems pretty innocuous to me.  Their beef?  The fact that I would suggest that the only way their electeds would have a shot next time around would be to maintain an electoral deal with Vision Vancouver – leading me to conclude that they were Tim Louis diehards that are still smarting over the 2004 splitting of the parties.  To those that sent along their messages, let me say that there was no venom intended against your party.  Rather, I was only offering an observation and dare I say a hope that COPE and Vision Vancouver can continue to cooperate, if for nothing else to maintain a progressive majority (and I include the COPE and Green caucuses in that description) at City Hall.

• Yes, we have heard of the internal documents at City Hall that seemed to indicate dissatisfaction with the working environment and the overall morale of city employees.  So, to see that this kind of a survey is now being conducted seems like a really strong step forward, and the fact that the city unions are supportive makes the process even more legitimate in terms of content and potential corrective actions.  There has been great change at City Hall over the past two years – that is a statement that no one is going to argue with.  And, with significant organizational change comes blowback of varying degrees – this is something that is quite normal.  But moving forward, the sentiment behind reaching out to employees to seek out opinions shows not only a willingness to listen, but more realistically, an understanding that widespread malcontent can lead to gridlock when it comes to advancing an agenda.  City Manager Penny Ballem is a smart woman, and is not going to let frustrations and grievances bubble to the surface of her organization so that policy and administrative paralysis can occur.

Ok folks, that’s it for now.  If you can enjoy the sunshine on this, the first day of fall, then go out and live it up – it is beautiful out there.