Posts Tagged ‘Geoff Meggs’

What was City Council told about Ark Tsisserev on January 21?

Posted by Jonathan Ross

City Council doesn't seem to be getting a full picture on a number of issues within City Hall.

Far be it from me to try and rival what Tsakumis is doing with this story, because his investigation over the past month and a half has been quite extensive.

For those unfamiliar with the issue, here is the Vancouver Courier’s Allen Garr and his account of the situation.

But in the vein of last week’s Vancouver Sun column, I am specifically interested in the January 21 in-camera City Council meeting that notified Council of Tsisserev’s departure and suggested Will Johnston, former Chief Building Official, as his replacement.

More specifically, I want to know what city staff conveyed to the electeds.

Read the rest of this entry »

CivicScene on CBC Radio this afternoon

Posted by Jonathan Ross

CivicScene will be on CBC Radio this afternoon.

I will be appearing on CBC Radio’s “On The Coast” program at 5:20pm PST today to discuss the Olympic Village inaccessibility controversy.  CBC is 690 on the AM dial and 88.1 on FM.

On a more sombre note, I want to wish my long-time friend Councillor Geoff Meggs a speedy recovery after a brutal accident yesterday morning.  My family is thinking of you and hope you will be back to your usual frantic pace in short order.

City of Vancouver’s Broadway corridor planning is overly optimistic

Posted by Jonathan Ross

The Evergreen line limbo should be a wake-up call for the City of Vancouver.

Tomorrow, Vancouver’s Special Standing Committee of Council on Planning and Environment will be presented with a staff policy report outlining the suggested terms of engagement for TransLink’s UBC Line Rapid Transit Study.

The study, which is a partnered project between Translink, the City of Vancouver, UBC, the University Endowment Lands, and Metro Vancouver, will identify a wide range of rapid transit options for the Broadway corridor including a preferred route, technology(ies), and general station locations.

Here is what Geoff Meggs told News 1130 about how such a line would already be able pay for itself:

“There already are more people riding on buses, jammed on buses, hanging on straps on buses, watching buses drive by them, than we need to justify the line.”

The evidence to support such claims is concrete and real, and Meggs is doing his job in advocating for Vancouver’s transit needs first and foremost.  However, with the spectre of the yet-to-be-started Evergreen Line hanging over Translink and their next steps towards progressing forward on regional transportation, these plans for the city seem extremely premature.

Read the rest of this entry »

Meggs is right – Translink is just a scapegoat

Posted by Jonathan Ross

The business "drive out the tax" voices are going after the wrong target in Translink.

I can understand Councillor Geoff Meggs’ frustration with the “Drive Out the Tax” campaign, as it does seem to let the province entirely off the hook from the equation that is causing the coalition members such heartache.

It is the province that needs to take a hard look at itself and the burdens unfairly being spread around to sources that cannot possibly pony up enough to bridge these shortfalls.

As I have mentioned in a previous post, I feel that Translink held the Mayor’s Council at Metro Vancouver for a $130 million ransom back in October – give us more cash, or your transit service levels go back to 1990 levels.  This of course was caused by the complete lack of interest in taking responsibility for public transit by the Gordon Campbell administration:

“Cities had been poised to consider a bigger funding increase, stumping up $275 million in large part by charging an annual vehicle levy, provided the province delivers other sources, such as road pricing, to add another $175 million.

That’s off the table because Victoria balked and [Shirley] Bond on Monday continued to argue that local cities can raise more for TransLink from property taxes – an option the mayors reject.”

I do agree that the downtown businesses most definitely played their cards wrong by not protesting as loudly as possible when the province eliminated Translink’s ability to levy  the parking stall tax.  They continue to miss the buck with this campaign, largely out of fear of pissing off the Premier.

So as a result, an organization that is cash-starved gets the brunt of the attack.  Am I suggesting that Translink and the way it is administered can’t be dramatically improved?  Absolutely not.

But realistically, like Meggs suggests, a couple of fired executives and internal cutbacks are not going to solve the chronic crisis of underfunding that Translink currently faces.  We are talking hundreds of millions – even billions – of dollars that need to be kicked in before any 10-year transportation dream can be properly contemplated within Metro Vancouver.

Once again, these kinds of funding gaps are far too massive to expect homeowners, businesses and municipalities to make up.

Ultimately, whatever “restructuring” and “mandate shifting” that I am predicting will occur with Translink over the coming years, the burden of failure will fall squarely on the shoulders of the Premier – an individual that unfortunately continues to fall through the cracks when it comes to British Columbia’s business community.

Fri Mar 19, 2010

March 2010
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
  
 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31  

FACT OF THE DAY

An article titled Vancouver Politics by Paul Tennant in The Vancouver Book (1976), describes the entry of TEAM onto the civic political scene in 1968. TEAM, wrote Tennant, “sought to be a moderate reform group appealing to persons of all political ideologies.”

On their left was COPE (the Committee of Progressive Electors), also formed in 1968, and on their right was the NPA (the Non-Partisan Association), which had been a power in city politics for nearly four decades, and which “held that the affairs of the city should be run by those with the necessary knowledge and experience, i.e., those with a professional-managerial background, in order to run the city in a business-like way.”

The reformers, on the other hand, “felt that civic decision-making should be open to the public, with leadership coming from a cross-section of the population, and rule going to the working class majority. This group was concerned about land use, they advocated city control, and preferred to structure politics around the neighborhood concept.”

Quote OF THE DAY

“It was very diverse, and we got together by word of mouth. There were professors, business people, labor, lawyers and from all across the city. It was a coalescing of people around the idea we should do something.” – former City Councillor Setty Pendakur on the formation Vancouver’s reform movement and its political manifestation – TEAM – came into being in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s.

Archive

Tags