Beacon Hill Park tents were the right thing to do
Re: “Beacon Hill Park was hardly a healthy refuge,” letter, Oct. 10.
I live a block from Beacon Hill Park and I read this letter with interest.
The writer attacks Ben Isitt for a decision made by the City of Victoria to temporarily relax the enforcement of bylaws prohibiting people to shelter in city parks in 2020.
Significantly, the writer fails to mention why the City of Victoria took that difficult but necessary action during the dire early days of the COVID-19 pandemic.
On June 8, 2020, Provincial Health Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry wrote to municipalities to alert them to the infection hazards posed by concentrated homeless encampments, such as existed on some of Victoria’s downtown streets.
She noted that many shelters had closed and reminded councils that they “have an important role to play to support people experiencing homelessness to reduce health risks.”
Both she and the B.C. Centre for Disease Control recommended “adjustments to the enforcement of local bylaws regarding overnight sheltering or camping in public parks.”
The decision by city council and Isitt to temporarily allow people to shelter in city parks was more than prudent, it was an act of compassion in an emergency.
As a neighbour of Beacon Hill Park and a daily user of it, I’ve seen the errors in the inflammatory rhetoric about the park being destroyed by council’s decision.
A larger threat to the park is in fact the proposal to open it up to much more extensive vehicular traffic. I can attest to the fact that the city’s small adjustments to traffic patterns have been positive and have, as Isitt says, made the park a “healthy refuge from traffic, noise and pollution.”
Larry Hannant
Victoria
Election makes a mockery of democracy?
When Elections B.C. does a post-mortem on this municipal election for the legislature, they may want to look at the lengthy ballots, plus residency and nomination requirements.
The longest ballots in the country were Vancouver with 137 candidates, followed by Surrey with 84 and Victoria with 75. The CBC News survey includes all candidates for mayor, council, school board, and in Vancouver’s case, a seven-person park board.
So voters must sift through flotsam and jetsam in the news media and advertising to find serious and qualified candidates truly committed to public office.
As a result, some voters are staying away from the polls because of the overwhelming number of candidates.
Some civic political parties may very well be stacking the ballot with pseudo-candidates to drain away votes from the more serious candidates and opponents. Considering the closeness of some elections — much like any gerrymandering — this tactic alone makes a mockery of democracy.
In recent years the province has moved to prevent candidates from running in multiple jurisdictions (although they can still run simultaneously for council and school board). You are now ineligible to run for office if convicted of and sentenced for an indictable offence and are in custody.
But why is British Columbia the only province to allow residents living outside a municipality to run for public office and manage the affairs of taxpayers in another municipality?
Is it time to review the nomination requirements and hike the refundable nomination fee from $100 to $500, and the number of nomination signatures from 25 to 100?
Would a ward system — similar to almost all major urban centres in the country — be worthy of exploring?
While it sounds and looks like democracy, it seems anything but.
Stan Bartlett, vice-chair
Grumpy Taxpayer$ of Greater Victoria
Finally, a chance for hope and optimism
The good and the bad.
The bad. Crime, violence and assaults continue to run wild in Victoria.
The good. There are finally new council candidates who will treat public safety as reality and view it is an important issue.
It has been far too long since we had hope and optimism. Make it count.
Brad Smith
Victoria
Not as many unused suites as province says
I participated in the federal census enumeration more than 10 years ago. As I proceeded to canvass through nice residential neighbourhoods, owners would not identify that people lived in the secondary suites because it was illegal.
However, it was obvious that people lived in the secondary suites. My job was to identify all the people in the house because government funding is based on population.
I do not believe there are as many empty suites as the provincial government alleges. Homeowners are using the secondary suites to help with the mortgage, but everything is calm and maintained in order to not be discovered.
Elizabeth Jackson
Saanich
MSP premiums helped us know about spending
Not being privy to the minister of finance’s methods of doling out our tax money to the various departments, I have no idea of how much of our general revenue taxes goes directly to our health-care systems.
I don’t know whether it’s more than was provided by the former paid premiums for the MSP or less or the same.
I believe my former premiums were just transferred into my annual income taxes. At least when I was paying my premiums to the MSP, I knew or at least was pretty darn certain, that my payments were going into the health-care system.
Now that we no longer pay this premium, I can only speculate where that money is winding up. Perhaps to purchase more cement highway barriers, or grants to study why only the female mosquito bites, or a new arena for Fort Street.
Just for the assurance that my contributions were going into our health-care system, I would gladly have the premiums re-instated and/or increased as necessary.
Political suicide for the government perhaps, but maybe I’m not alone.
Ben Weber
Mill Bay
Follow expert advice, don’t ignore it
Re: “Salt Spring’s governance model needs to be fixed,” commentary, Oct. 8.
David Fullbrook’s comments about the Islands Trust show a misunderstanding of the community he is working in and the governance he is dealing with.
There are 13 islands in the Trust Area, each electing two trustees, which is a total of 26 trustees in the Trust Council, not the 14 he calculates.
He states he “strongly” disagrees with the commentary from local resident Frants Attorp, but agrees “that a lot is on the line for Salt Spring this election.”
Fair enough, but going on to say that he doesn’t “believe the most pressing issue before island voters today is affordable housing, climate change or rising street crime” suggests he believes that the approval for his development is more important than the serious issues most other residents do feel are critical to the health of their community.
He then attempts to conflate economic difficulties, lack of housing and people leaving the island to the Trust, which only has responsibility for land use.
Furthermore, the public record will show that local trustee Laura Patrick did not “champion” a review of the Islands Trust or the Trust Act as he claims. In fact, trustee Patrick and all her fellow members of the executive committee voted against having a review by an independent consultant, Great Northern Management.
Attorp stated clearly and quite rightly that the process through which Fullbrook’s Vortex project is being subjected has serious misgivings, and therefore may have irreparable implications to the environment.
Trustees have chosen to ignore the findings and recommendations of their own staff and specialists that raise those concerns. It’s one thing to insist upon scientific data, it’s quite another to ignore those findings because they don’t support your particular desired outcome.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion of course, but opinions lose their value if not based upon correct information. Attempts to revise the public record are not helpful.
Steve Wright
Pender Island
Looking for analysis of the zero-carbon idea
On Aug. 8, Victoria council voted that “all new construction to be zero carbon by 2025.”
However, I was unable to find any information regarding the cost-benefit analysis for that decision, so by email, I asked the mayor and councillors, but I have not had any answers.
The questions I asked were:
1. What would have been the additional total cost if all new construction in Victoria in the past year had been required to meet the new zero carbon standard?
2. How were the benefits of the zero-carbon-by-2025 decision estimated?
3. How much do the benefits outweigh the costs?
4. How will the cost and the benefits be measured in the future?
5. Was anyone absent for the vote, abstained, or voted against the motion, and if so, who?
As a Victoria taxpayer, I appreciate transparency from my elected representatives in making such major decisions, and I expect citizens to be provided with a cost-benefit analysis to support such decisions.
Patrick Hunt
Victoria
SEND US YOUR LETTERS
• Email letters to: [email protected]
• Mail: Letters to the editor, Times Colonist, 201-655 Tyee Rd., Victoria, B.C. V9A 6X5
• Submissions should be no more than 250 words; subject to editing for length and clarity. Provide your contact information; it will not be published. Avoid sending your letter as an email attachment.
