Progressive Nanaimo

A group that I helped start up on Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/ProgressiveNanaimo


I withdrew from the group after the first meeting for non-incumbent candidates as they will likely be supporting a few of them; conflict of interest.


Check out the videos from the meetings
Oct 14th https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLanAKY2RqlVrmrUL7wsg313rIhTeP5HCs
Sept 17th  https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLanAKY2RqlVoNYI5q-QLlrTuCn1tJLNRN


and the candidate profiley thingy's with questions and answers given; click on the photos.


Here is mine:  https://www.facebook.com/ProgressiveNanaimo/photos/pb.498975440234956.-2207520000.1413495048./542899215842578/?type=1&theater

Governance and Participatory Democracy

This will be one of the biggest issues, along with Colliery Dams, moving forward into the next council mandate.  Discussion has happened with the Watson & Habkirk Reports but no final decisions made.

The one to really pay attention to is the Eli Mina report as it will, if adopted, severely curtail public input.  Participatory Democracy is a tenet of Nanaimo's Strategic plan and is something I have been encouraging since getting involved in the municipal process.

It is something I will fight for when elected to council as well as greater opportunity's for such.


Governance Framework,  Watson - July 2013: http://www.nanaimo.ca/assets/Municipal~Hall/City~Council/Publications~and~Forms/2013WatsonGovernanceFrameworkSummaryReport.pdf

April 16 Pages 4 thru 21 Habkirk report:https://www.nanaimo.ca/UploadedFilesPath/Site_Structure/Corporate_Services/Corporate_Administration/2014_Committee_Agendas/SOGSC140416A.pdf

March 27 Pages 6 - 27 Eli Mina Report: https://www.nanaimo.ca/UploadedFilesPath/Site_Structure/Corporate_Services/Corporate_Administration/2014_Committee_Agendas/SOGSC140327A.pdf

From Jim Taylor Blog:
Staff Views, turn it loudhttp://www.nanaimo-info-blog.com/2014/04/nanaimo-city-hall-killing-democracy.html

Agenda May 15 pgs 4 - 44 https://www.nanaimo.ca/UploadedFilesPath/Site_Structure/Corporate_Services/Corporate_Administration/2014_Committee_Agendas/SOGSC140515A.pdf

May 21 Governance Review Agenda:
Council roles, responsibilities and relationships pgs 5 - 21https://www.nanaimo.ca/UploadedFilesPath/Site_Structure/Corporate_Services/Corporate_Administration/2014_Committee_Agendas/SOGSC140521A.pdf

Link to ALL Governance Steering Committee Agendas/Minutes:http://www.nanaimo.ca/meetings/?Q=&Year=ALL&Abbreviation=GSC
Surprisingly there have not been that many.

Videos:
April 16thhttp://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLanAKY2RqlVroZdj6OGX1-dOIm6acJ9-3
May 15thhttp://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLanAKY2RqlVriC2yXpzQzJTCRonsQ9S6R
May 21st http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLanAKY2RqlVo391nu0oKRze4JtRHQ5f0X
Council Meeting Monday June 9, 2014http://www.nanaimo.ca/meetings/VideoPlayer/Index/C140609V

Letters to the Editor; Daily News

Here is a link to many of my letters to the editor in the Daily News; this one works :)

http://www.nanaimodailynews.com/searchresults-7.3409?q=Gordon+W.+Fuller

From the search engine of the Bulletin; for some reason only goes back to 2012.

http://www.nanaimobulletin.com/search/?q=Gordon+W.+Fuller&ie=UTF-8&cx=015619971846971042401%3Aggfawncw3ho

Previous Links

Sadly in the Spring of 2013 the Nanaimo Daily News switched from Canada.com to being its own service provider; this has resulted in the links associated with stories from the Daily News no longer being accessible.

What one can try is copying the tittle and pasting it in the search box, upper right, of the D/N website:  http://www.nanaimodailynews.com/

One might also have to do the same to those links to stories from the Bulletin as well.

Extreme Tardiness

Been quite a while since posting but do have many more posts to come.

Been busy with work and attending council meetings; here is an example :

·       View 13(a) and then my question during question period. T'is a shame that there is no code of conduct for Mayor & Council and that even with Robert's Rules of Order Guiding meetings they are selective when using:)

http://www.nanaimo.ca/meetings/VideoPlayer/Index/COW130225V

Have been doing a lot of posting on my Municipally (A)MUSING facebook group page; requires far less writing :)

https://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/112340092206683/?bookmark_t=group

 

As I say much more to come on many local issues.

Strategic Plan Finale

Not a huge document by any means but the city will also have all of the info gathered, surveys, comments etc., if you are interested in seeing it.

During the upcoming discussions of the 2013/14 budget the city will try and put some costs towards implementation, ought to be amusing.

Disappointed that nowhere in the document is it mentioned that a core review should happen on a regular basis.

http://www.nanaimo.ca/assets/Municipal~Hall/City~Council/Strategic~Planning/CityofNanaimoCorporateStrategicPlan.pdf

Contribution Conflict

The following is with regards to something that has irked me to no end for years and that I have posted about before.  Now don’t get me wrong here I am not opposed to development; what I am opposed to is development that contributes little to the community and the benefit thereof.

This story and the quoted comment appeared in the D/N just over a week ago: Council aims to make development more consistent  This guest comment is also of interest as it talks about the Frank Ney era in Nanaimo and as you can see things have not changed. 

At the end of this I have placed a link to the last council agenda, pgs 47-50 deal with the above, and to the video thereof.  Check out the discussion by clicking on 8 b - DPRC - Amenity Contributions as well as my comments at question period. The decisions in the report were made by the Development Process Review Committee, see link, a committee comprised of council members and those who profit directly from development. 

In a city that is constantly falling millions behind on fixing its infrastructure; paying 2-3% and growing of its budget towards interest on debt; lacking funds to purchase large properties for parks, such as Linley Valley West or now the controversial Pioneer Park and only sees the paltry sum of approx $165,000 going towards its Housing Legacy Reserve fund each year, there is a huge need to increase revenue.

Rezoning of properties, small and large, is usually brought before council and touted as increasing density which is a core concept in the Official Community Plan.  This in and of itself is a good idea and will ultimately help create a larger tax base but in saying this the taxes it will create are by no means enough to eliminate the ongoing deficit caused by the costs to maintaining a large city such as Nanaimo.

 These new ‘policies’ are no different than guidelines that have been used for decades and are a cop out on the part of council.  Huge profits are made on larger developments; in many cases even before ground is broken. 

A perfect example would be the area of Cable Bay known as the OceanView Golf Resort & Spa. Land worth about 3 million dollars once rezoned by a previous council is now up for sale at 60 million.  Proposing 2500 homes the community contribution would be a paltry 2.5 million and if built the value, at an average sale price of $300,000 would far exceed the 60 million sale price of the property coming in at $750 million; this without even accounting for the value of the associated businesses that would surround the golf resort and spa. 

Sure Development Cost Charges will help with installation of sewer and water but will the increased taxes provided by the subdivision pay for upkeep over the years; I don’t think so.  Nanaimo needs to get more realistic with its community contributions.

Increased density is the catch phrase for many potential developments, Cable Bay and Sandstone being the largest examples, getting their rezoning pushed through council. Never mind that for these two, one could just as easily use the words urban sprawl as the outcome.

Another purported benefit the community sees is that of the community contribution on the part of the developer for the privilege of density bonuses and potential millions lining their pockets.  Sadly, Nanaimo’s amenity contribution is archaic, nay pathetic, to say the least. Based on $1,000 per unit, these contributions usually amount to little more than a tot lot.

Vancouver requires 20 per cent of units, or the equivalent in cash or land, go toward future social housing. Langford, with one quarter the population of Nanaimo, has a one-in-10 policy. Based on a $300,000 average home value, Nanaimo’s contribution will equate to only one-third of one per cent.

With rising unemployment, poverty and an increasing population, the need for social housing, parks, paying down debt and decreasing the tax burden on its citizens dictate the need for Nanaimo to do better – $10,000 per unit or 3.333 per cent seems a little more equitable commitment and while nowhere near that of Vancouver and Langford, it could see some of those potential profits trickle down toward real contributions to the community. 

Vancouver, Langford, Kelowna and many other cities require a far greater percentage for community contributions as should Nanaimo.  Monies raised through the process, far more significant if the contribution were raised to 5 or 6 thousand and still quite profitable for the developer, could actually be enough to add significant funds to the future purchase of parks, paying down debt, adding to the housing legacy reserve fund and yes even lowering city taxes.  I am not against development but it must come with a more realistic benefit to the community. 

Agenda http://www.nanaimo.ca/UploadedFilesPath/Site_Structure/Corporate_Services/Corporate_Administration/2012_Council_Agendas/C120625A.pdf

Video

http://www.nanaimo.ca/meetings/VideoPlayer/Index/C120625V

 Development Process Review Committee

http://www.nanaimo.ca/assets/Municipal~Hall/City~Council/CommitteesCommissionsBoards/DPRC.pdf