City Council scoresheet for April 12, 2010

The Wednesday, April 14 edition of the Daily News featured their regular scorecard on city council issues, this one featuring the deliberations and votes from selected items of the April 12 session of council. .

This weeks feature appeared on page three of the Wednesday edition.

Question One:  The owner of the commercial property that houses Movie Gallery at 101 First Avenue East, requested a development permit to convert a portion of the second floor into an apartment.

How council voted:

Mayor Jack Mussallem-- Yes
Councillor Anna Ashley-- Yes
Councillor Kathy Bedard-- Yes
Councillor Nelson Kinney-- Yes
Councillor Gina Garon-- Yes
Councillor Sheila Gordon-Payne-- Yes
Councillor Joy Thorkelson-- Yes

Question Two: Council approved a request to host the North Central Local Government Association's 2011 Annual Convention in Prince Rupert. I t will not incur any costs to the City.

 How council voted:

 Mayor Jack Mussallem-- Yes
 Councillor Anna Ashley-- Yes
 Councillor Kathy Bedard-- Yes
 Councillor Nelson Kinney-- Yes
 Councillor Gina Garon-- Yes
 Councillor Sheila Gordon-Payne-- Yes
 Councillor Joy Thorkelson-- Yes

Question Three: Council adopted the 2010 Five Year Financial Plan, Fees and Charges Amendment and Bylaw and 2010 City of Prince Rupert Property Tax Bylaw Reports submitted by Chief Financial Officer, Dan Rodin Public consideration for the reports scheduled for April 26, during the regularly scheduled council meeting.


How council voted:

 Mayor Jack Mussallem-- Yes
 Councillor Anna Ashley-- Yes
 Councillor Kathy Bedard-- Yes
 Councillor Nelson Kinney-- Yes
 Councillor Gina Garon-- Yes
 Councillor Sheila Gordon-Payne-- Yes
 Councillor Joy Thorkelson-- Yes


Question Four: Council selected Appendix A2 from the Chief Financial Officer's 2010 Property Tax Levy Adjustment. Under Appendix A2 - "tax Shift" Methodology, Residential tax will be set at 9.12931 and Business at 26.66596, shifting a portion of the property tax burden from Class Six (6) Businesss Class One (1) Residential.

How council voted:

Mayor Jack Mussallem-- Yes
Councillor Anna Ashley-- No
Councillor Kathy Bedard-- Yes
Councillor Nelson Kinney-- No
Councillor Gina Garon-- Yes 
Councillor Sheila Gordon-Payne-- Yes 
Councillor Joy Thorkelson-- No


Question Five: Council gave first and second reading to approve a new map that will be used in context of the public community plan. A chance for public comment is scheduled for May 8, 2010.


How council voted:

Mayor Jack Mussallem-- Yes 
Councillor Anna Ashley-- Yes 
Councillor Kathy Bedard-- Yes
Councillor Nelson Kinney-- Yes
Councillor Gina Garon-- Yes
Councillor Sheila Gordon-Payne-- Yes
Councillor Joy Thorkelson-- Yes

City council score sheet for March 22, 2010

The Wednesday, March 24 edition of the Daily News featured their regular scorecard on city council issues, this one featuring the deliberations and votes from selected items of the March 22 session of council. .

This weeks feature appeared on page three of the Wednesday edition.

Question One:  That Council approve the City to execute the required legal documents to act as a Guarantor for a loan of $40,000 to the Prince Rupert Golf Course Society from Northern Savings Credit Union.

How council voted:

Mayor Jack Mussallem-- Yes
Councillor Anna Ashley-- Yes
Councillor Kathy Bedard-- Yes
Councillor Nelson Kinney-- Yes
Councillor Gina Garon-- Yes
Councillor Sheila Gordon-Payne-- Yes
Councillor Joy Thorkelson-- Yes

Question Two: That the Development Variance Permit Application No. DP-10-03 for  747 Taylor Street proceed to Public Notification.

 How council voted:

 Mayor Jack Mussallem-- Yes
 Councillor Anna Ashley-- Yes
 Councillor Kathy Bedard-- Yes
 Councillor Nelson Kinney-- Yes
 Councillor Gina Garon-- Yes
 Councillor Sheila Gordon-Payne-- Yes
 Councillor Joy Thorkelson-- Yes

Question Three: Jack Mussallem, Mayor of the City of Prince Rupert hereby proclaim April 9, 2010 as "Daffodil Day" in the City of Prince Rupert. 

 How council voted:

 Mayor Jack Mussallem-- Yes
 Councillor Anna Ashley-- Yes
 Councillor Kathy Bedard-- Yes
 Councillor Nelson Kinney-- Yes
 Councillor Gina Garon-- Yes
 Councillor Sheila Gordon-Payne-- Yes
 Councillor Joy Thorkelson-- Yes

Re-zoning on hold while City ponders the impact of plans for east side of city

A rezoning request for property just off of Highway 16 and Frederick in the east side of the city has been held up for further investigation, that after local residents and Councillor Joy Thorkelson expressed concerns over how the rezoning might impact on a residential trailer park in the area.

The application came up for discussion at Tuesday’s regular council meeting, with a number of residents of the trailer park in attendance to seek the assistance of city councilors.

The rezoning application is designed to allow D and N Seafoods to expand their current operation on their property there, a move that they suggest could in the future result in an increase of at least ten jobs for the operation.

Residents of a near by trailer park however, some of them having lived their for ten years or more are afraid that should the project get a go ahead, then it’s only a matter of time before they are forced out of their homes.

The Daily News outlined some of the background on the planned rezoning and the outcry against it all part of the Wednesday paper.

Council mulls possible loss of trailers
By Patrick Witwicki
The Daily News
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Pages one and three

Prince Rupert City Council decided to hold off on approving rezoning for a development just off Highway 16, in an effort to uncover whether or not the owner of the land would consider coming up with an agreement with residents who currently live in trailers on the land in question.

City planning consultant Zeno Krekic presented his report at the public meeting Tuesday night inside council chambers, saying that rezoning bylaw 3266. 2008 and 3267, 2008 would simply allow the owner of that land and D & N Seafood to expand their operations, which in the future could create 10 new jobs for the people of Prince Rupert.

But some expressed concern that 17 trailers still stand on the property in question, and Coun. Joy Thorkelson was concerned that residents on that land might suddenly find themselves homeless.

“My concern is the trailer park,” she said.

“What are the rights of the trailer park owners?

Krekic advised council that the owner, referred to as “Mr. Lee,” had made arrangements with some of the residents, and that other properties that still exist on the land are “non-conforming,” and would not be immediately affected by the proposed development.

But resident Elizabeth Stewart painted a different picture when she told council tat she feared she would be evicted.

“We have lived out there for 18 years, and we wanted to live out there the rest of our lives, she said.

“But now they’re saying we may have one year, we may have two.

“What are we supposed to do? With us just on a small pension, I don’t know what we’re supposed to do.”

Stewart then added that the owner had offered a year’s free rent, which is worth approximately $2,600.

“That’s the price of my home?” she said.

Mayor Herb Pond tried to assure Stewart and other residents still on the land in question that the rezoning bylaw would not affect their immediate future in any way, only that by giving the report a third reading would the developer be in a position to begin looking at expansion.

Krekic added: “The owner’s reaction or response to those residents on the site will be the same today or tomorrow, regardless what we choose to do. That is up to the owner and the tenant.”

Krekic explained that a non-conforming property - in this case a trailer – would be left alone for the time being, whereas a trailer that is no longer deemed non-conforming – for example, on that is abandoned or half burned – would be removed from the land.

Victor Prystay was on-hand representing Mr. Lee, and he backed up Krekic’s statements.

“This is a proposal that would put 10 jobs in Prince Rupert, but we would need the back part of the land,” he said.

He added that many of the trailers, including the Stewarts’, would not be affected by the development plans.

But Thorkelson was not convinced, and when the issue resurfaced during the regular council meeting, she once again voiced her concern.

“I’m a little cranky about this issue,” she said. “I don’t have a problem with what D & N plans to do, but I do have a problem with forcing people from their homes, where they have nowhere to go.

“If we go through with this, I’d want assurances from Mr. Lee that they could stay there.”

Coun. Tony Briglio said that he didn’t think council could legally impose rules on the owner, or in the same breath, the tenant when it came to this issue.

“We can only deal with the portion of the request that is being made,” he said.

Coun. Ken Cote added: “It’s so difficult to find people willing to develop here in Prince Rupert… D & N might say we’re not going to develop it (if we don’t accept this rezoning)

Briglio then suggested that city staff meet with Mr. Lee to find out what options are out there for the tenants, and Thorkelson then made the motion to defer the decision until the next council meeting.

You bring the pitchfork, I’ll grab the torch and we’ll all meet on the City Hall porch!

Monday’s city council meeting should be an illuminating event for Mayor Pond and his council; it appears that a segment of the peasantry is in revolt and planning on making a stand at the upcoming council meeting.

The hot topic of the civic hiring process regarding Tanalee Hesse, as administered to by Mayor Pond, has boiled over on the back burner and suddenly flared to life again.

A quasi secret gathering this past week (not quite open to the general public, yet clearly not all that secret as so many folks seem to have known about it) at a local establishment, is reported to have featured an invited group of concerned citizens who expressed their frustrations and concerns to an invited group of councillors.

The secretive nature of the meeting seems to run contrary to the growing demand for openness and transparency in these public matters, and would kind of appear to be much the same kind of thing as what folks have been railing about in recent weeks.

Then again perhaps they were fearful that such an emotional topic might provide for an overflow crowd and felt the need to keep the numbers manageable until further plans could be mobilized. Maybe it was the planning phase for a more inclusive public gathering, a town hall type of meeting where all the concerns floating around town can get a good and thorough hearing.

Regardless of their intentions this week, it would seem that the Star Chamber like conclave only steeled their resolve to carry forward. Judging by some of the blow back from that meeting, as channeled through the hackingthemainframe portal, it would seem that the concerned citizens did not find many satisfactory answers to their questions from some of the invited guests.

What did seem to come out of that gathering however, is a move to take the debate to the Mayors home turf of the council chambers on Monday night. An event that will surely make for one of the Mayor’s more interesting nights while employed as a our elected servant of the people of the City of Prince Rupert .

For the concerned citizens though there may be the need to give some thought to the tone of their approach. One of the participants online in the notification phase for Monday night’s show of people power, seems to have personalized the issue a tad more than perhaps the more cautious of the concerned citizens might like.

By focusing in on the “Issue with our City Manager and His wife” as the invite goes, the debate gets transferred from one of legitimate questions over a questionable hiring policy of the mayor’s and turns towards a more personal nature about the participants involved.

That’s a deviation that won’t be helpful in opening any dialogue as to how the hiring process was wrong. Instead it could solidify the impression of some that a bit of a witch hunt is underway.

That would be quite unfortunate as there clearly are some questions that need to be asked about all of what has been going on in the upper management offices of City Hall.

Regardless though, one suspects that it should be a fairly interesting night on council, and should make for some interesting headlines for the visitors from Alaska to the Southeast conference to take in when they take a look at the Tuesday paper.

For those who long ago migrated to the satellite dish, this could be the one night where you may want to invite yourself over to someone who has CityWest cable and is inclined to watch channel 10.

Or better yet, just head on down to City Hall yourself, the gavel drops at 7 pm, but get their early, it would seem that the good seats won’t last for long!

Hold onto your wallets Podunkians

The city is looking to generate some revenue for their strapped coffers and if there isn’t too much of a backlash it would seem that Prince Rupert residents will be in line for yet another tax increase.

Not inclined it seems to cut services or sell off such assets as CityWest, the city in need of a bit of a financial cushion to "maintain a healthy range of amenities" is once again looking towards the city’s taxpaying population.

City council examined options to increase taxation by between 3.5 and 5 per cent, but mindful that perhaps the tax burden is getting a little too onerous on the heavily taxed Rupert taxpayer, they will test the waters first next week.

Interestingly enough the city just last week announced a labour settlement with CUPE, providing for pay increases of 18.25 per cent over five years, an unusual financial move for a city apparently still struggling with its finances.

City residents can investigate things further at the public meeting on Monday April 21, council will then begin the decision process to determine how much if any of an increased tax burden that Rupertites can bear in a still sluggish local economy.

The budget documentation can be found on the city website, while we have found a few past thoughts on our elected official’s and taxation from the Podunkian archives...

April 25, 2007-- A favourite ATM

April 27, 2007-- When the sheep begin to grumble

September 22, 2007-- Accounting error not in your favour, do not pass go

November 30, 2007-- Onward, upward and into your pocket again!

December 13, 2007-- 45 minutes of talk, but still the rates will go up

December 20, 2007-- It’s not the Boston Tea Party, but some things have to start someplace

January 9, 2000-- Clip and keep handy for election time!
.

The issue was given a review on the front page of the Thursday Daily News.


COUNCIL MULLING TAX HIKE TO SUPPORT CRUCIAL SERVICES

Councillors say tax hike may be needed to maintain healthy range of amenities

By Leanne Ritchie
The Daily News
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Pages one and two

City council is examining the option of increasing the amount of revenue it seeks from its taxpayers this year in the range of 3.5 to five per cent. However, councillors want to hear opinions from the public before they firm up their decision.

According to Dan Rodin, the city's Chief Financial Officer, a five per cent increase would generate $500,000 for the city's coffers and work out to be an increase of $66 per year for a house valued $147,000 in the 2007 assessment year.

Prince Rupert Mayor Herb Pond described this year's budget as "holding the line" while the city waits for the growth in development that will increase the tax base and in turn help provide more funding for the city coffers.

He noted the city underwent a serious budget review in 2004, cutting everywhere it could, even going so far as to close down city operations one day a month. He did not feel there was anyone in the community left who wanted to take out the axe when it came to services.

Coun. Tony Briglio and Sheila Gordon-Payne agreed there is a fine line that needs to be balanced between retaining those services that will attract people to the community while remaining fiscally prudent.

"We are building a community ... that's what is going to take us back towards where we need to be," said Briglio.

In 2008, the city needs to generate an additional $300,000 in order to cover the raise it gave to CUPE Local 105 employees. In addition, RCMP costs are rising this year by $700,000. This includes the cost of hiring and outfitting one new RCMP officer, about $120,000.

In addition, there were cost savings attained by the RCMP in 2006 from using new recruits that were still on the training payroll. These cost savings resulted in a rebate for the city in 2007. However, that will not be repeated in 2008. And finally, the city, which covers 70 per cent of its policing costs, needs to cover the federally mandated increase to the RCMP pension plan.

This budget also does little to address the $8.9 million the city owes itself after borrowing from its reserves.

This money was spent from city coffers and reserves during the years the city believed it would ultimately receive tax payments from New Skeena Forest Products. Nor does it do much to address the $9 million the city owes other financial institutions.

Rodin also noted inflation is driving the price of services upwards, with the inflation of energy costs expected at 10 per cent, general inflation two per cent and non-residential construction at 14 per cent. With a hold-the-line budget, this means staff will be asked to do more with less because their dollars will not stretch as far.

And finally, this year's budget does very little to address the $70 million infrastructure deficit facing the city as the roads, sewers and facilities in town continue to age - and in some cases, fail.
The city is planning to spend about $1.8 million on capital projects in 2008, including $600,000 on the Hays Creek Bridge and sewer design and $300,000 on the landfill expansion.

"If we cobbled together another $1 million it would only be a finger in the dike," said Pond. "A municipality our size should probably be spending $3 million a year on maintenance alone."

It is the city's aging infrastructure that made both Coun. Joy Thorkelson and Ken Cote nervous.
When the Fulton Street water line broke last year, it cost the city half a million in repairs.
Thorkelson proposed the city look at ways to raise more money by borrowing, in order to start dealing with its aging roads and sewers.

"We keep asking everyone to do more, with less money to do it with," she said. "My biggest worry is not that we are spending too much but that we are not spending enough."
Meanwhile, Cote suggested the city needs to start looking at serious cuts, if not this year, then next.

"We can't have another hold-the-line budget. If we lose any other sources of revenue, we will have to make these big changes," he said.

The city agreed it will hold a public meeting on the budget prepared by staff on Mon., April 21, at 7 p.m. in city council chambers. Then, on April 28, it will review additional options presented by staff for either a 3.5 per cent, 4.5 per cent or five per cent increase and decide which rate increase to pursue. Councillors expect to have the budget adopted and in place by the May 15 provincial deadline.

For those interested, the budget documents are available on the city's web site and at city hall.

Absence, Accountability and that ever popular bit of Transparency

According to a Prince Rupert website, last night’s City regular Council meeting and Committee of the Whole sessions never took place, no civic business was conducted in Podunk on a Tuesday night and a rather ambitious agenda sat unfulfilled, hostage to a long weekend and an apparent inability to find enough elected officials to get the job done.

While our city council doesn’t exactly have the most onerous of municipal government schedules, (meeting once every couple of weeks) the prospect of summoning enough Councillors and a Mayor, for the session after the Easter weekend proved to be too much of a challenge.

With the mayor again out of town (engaged in a variety of out of town seminars and meetings as described eloquently by Councillor Briglio at the last actual session of council to find a quorum) it would once again fall upon the six city councilors to get to the work of Prince Rupert as put forward by the city hall staff.

.

Well, that was the plan anyways.
.
Alas, if our Internet reporter has his information correct (and considering his more than casual interest in city affairs we suspect it is) then city staff could not find the four necessary warm bodies to do the peoples work.

Now this isn’t necessarily a problematic development, there was the long weekend, the end of the school break, perhaps complicated travel schedules; there really could be any number of possible reasons for a missed session.

But what’s not clear is why they didn’t take a straw poll at the last meeting or the week following and realize that the next session would be a problem, and reschedule the session prior to its normal date. A little forward planning might have gone a long way in avoiding what will make for a bit of a black eye for elected civic politics around the city.

More importantly for the transparency aspect of this council, why didn’t the city publicly announce that this weeks session was postponed and advise when the rescheduled session will take place (if it will.)

The city does have a fancy looking website that could be used for these important advisories to the people, not just for the photo ops and newsletters. In fact there are details provided as to what the local government needs to do should there be a cancellation… Judging by the reading material, it’s not that hard to post a notice of postponement with an account of why (hence the accountability thing).

The other worrisome aspect of all of this is, that we’re learning of this missed session through a citizen journalist who posts his material on his own website. Where we wonder was the local media, which to our knowledge attend these council sessions from time to time and are supposed to be our independent check and balance on the doings of our city council.

There was no word of the cancellation in the Wednesday Daily News, nor did the Northern View have anything posted to their website, nothing was to be found on the TV 7 website or the CBC Daybreak site.

.

We didn’t listen to the Mix today or yesterday so we have no knowledge if the private radio station had what would amount to the scoop of the week from the local media gang.

.
So until the established media gets around to covering the situation, we’ll have to make do with the one line advisory and promise of more from e-princerupert.com, which promises a forthcoming review and roll call (whenever it may be posted) of those that stood ready to govern, but had to go home due to a lack of like minded elected officials.

What has yet to be determined is whether this missed session will be made up this week, next week or if it will be merged with the next regularly scheduled session of council on April 14th.

Of even more importance, will we be able to count on a full complement of elected officials to take a look at what’s been going on while they’ve been away?

.

For those interested in score keeping here's the latest count of attendance thus far at city council in 2008 (not including the postponed session of last night), it's always available on the right hand side of this blog in the Podunk Service centre.

Graham/Atlin area residents make a bid to silence train whistles on the watefront

With the Fairview Container Port now an active place of industry once again, residents in areas immediately adjacent are growing weary of hearing the sound of train whistles at all hours of the day. It's a byproduct of progress that they are finding a little irritating of late, and one that they are looking to their elected muncipal representatives to remedy.

To that end, city council will entertain a delegation on Monday evening and then introduce a report into an anti whistling bylaw, that will most likely be designed to bring some peace and quiet to those who's nerves are now being jangled.

Included in the city council agenda posted on line, is a copy of the petition of local residents, as well as a collection of documentation that pertains to the case of the whistling train engines.

Residents point to a similar bylaw in Terrace as a good guide for the city of Prince Rupert to look to when addressing the issue.

That item, as well as a look at some early budget approval on capital projects (from the purchase of new trucks, to repairs to Hays Creek bridge and some work in the cruise dock area improvements to name a few) will be on the nightly to do list.

As well as a few other bits of business set to make it to the council chambers on Monday night, with a different start time of 6 pm for those that like to drop in and watch municipal government at work.

Councillor Briglio Charged over alleged assault!

CFTK TV 7 News is reporting that Councillor Tony Briglio has been formally charged with assault, stemming from an incident at this summer's Seafest beer gardens at the Civic Centre.

His first appearance in Prince Rupert court is scheduled for January 7th.

From the TV 7 website:

Councillor Charged
Mon, 2007-12-17 19:08.
Local News

A Prince Rupert City Councillor is to appear in court next month, in connection with a brawl at this year's Seafest.

Tony Briglio has been formally charged with assault, and is to make his first formal court appearance January 7th.

On June 10th, a Seafest volunteer claims he was kicked and bitten, as he attempted to remove Briglio from the Seafest beer gardens at the Jim Ciccone Civic Centre.

Briglio is currently in his second term as a city councillor and also chairs the Northwest Regional Hospital District.

Herb’s kind of town…

How we gonna keep our politicians on Kaien island, once they’ve seen Chicago?



It’s a good thing that Prince Rupert’s Mayor Herb Pond once had a background in the airline industry, at least he’ll be able to make the right connections to the various functions that he is busy jetting off to these days.

Just prior to last weeks UBCM bunfest in Vancouver, the Mayor was busy traveling half way across the continent. As Mayor Pond took up his spot as an invited speaker to a convention of the Western Hemisphere's mayors in Chicago.

He presented his thoughts on the challenges facing municipalities in the face of growing globalization, and provided input on how Prince Rupert is preparing to take on the changes that will come with our container port about to begin operation.

The Northern View featured some background information on the Mayor’s visit to Chicago, buried rather deep in the weekly paper, it can be found on page 19 of the October 3rd edition or right below.

POND A SPEAKER AT MAYOR’S MEETING
By Brooke Ward
The Northern View
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
Page 19

Prior to joining fellow British Columbian mayors and municipal government leaders in Vancouver for the annual Union of British Columbia Municipalities conference last week Prince Rupert mayor Herb Pond made the trek to Chicago, where he was invited to speak at the Western Hemisphere Mayors Conference on the topic of the effects of globalization.

Surrounded by big city leaders from as far as Rio de Janeiro and Miami and as close as Vancouver, Pond might have been a bit of a country mouse amongst the crowd, but he relished in the chance to talk about many of the issues he believes that Prince Rupert will be and already is facing is facing along with economic and social growth.

“It was just an inspirational time to be talking to world leaders who are facing all kinds of problems and see how they are dealing with some of them. All these big cities were there and so just to get a grasp on how they’re dealing with everything from addressing crime to education, it was a mind-expanding time,” said Pond.

“It was amazing, a real opportunity to talk about the role of globalization, the role of transportation in this different economy.” He added.

Pond also had the opportunity to spend a good chunk of time with Canada’s Constable General in Chicago and took advantage of the occasion to talk business.

“The prime purpose of their office is to facilitate trade, so there was a lot of discussion about how they might assist Prince Rupert and Prince Rupert businesses in terms of doing business down in Chicago and how they might access that market, but conversely about what might be the opportunities for investment in Prince Rupert.

With the majority of container traffic from Fairview terminal destined for Chicago, Pond sees the establishment of these types of links and relationships vitally important.

“Roughly 70 per cent of the containers from the Port of Prince Rupert will be destined for Chicago and another 20 per cent of them will be going beyond Chicago, so it’s a key market for us to reach,” he said.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

His time in Chicago provided the chance to sit down and discuss items of importance with an impressive list of participants for sure. Yet you wonder if somehow there might not be some local people back here in the other Windy city that might like some of the mayor’s time as well.

Of course with such a hectic schedule it’s no wonder that the Mayor hasn’t responded to the sign in the front window of the Data Boy computer store. It was put up after frustration boiled over regarding a recent vandalism incident at that store. It expresses a sense of disgruntlement when it comes to high taxes, services and ongoing vandalism in the city.

Still prominently in place there after a number of weeks now, it asks for the mayor to drop in for a visit to discuss some of the many issues that the small business community is concerned about. Only less than a block away, there hasn’t been much movement from City Hall for a trip down the street to gauge the pulse of the ever decreasing commercial sector in the city.

While it’s good to represent the city on the provincial and world stage for that matter, our city councilors and Mayor need to remember that in politics everything is, in the end local. There are no votes on election day in Vancouver, Alaska or Chicago, it’s how you are remembered by the folks that wander down to the Civic Centre in November every three (soon to be four) years that will count in the end.

With money miscounted at City Hall, a tax load that is heavier than elsewhere in the province, continuing financial woes and declining infrastructure everywhere, showing some interest in the plight of the locals might be a good idea for now.

They seem to have a few questions of their elected municipal leaders, and judging by some of the feedback around town these days, they’re not getting the answers that they require or deserve.

A mystery solved!

Today we have a Podunkian exclusive!

An exhaustive search by our crack research team, has revealed some inside video of just how that now famous city hall accounting error, took place.




The logic error has translated into the need to trim five million dollars from the city’s budgetary accounting and perhaps a reduction for the cookie fund as well.

Council ponders how to resolve issues of domestic and feral animals

A horrific mauling at the waterfront park and the never ending issue of feral animals around the city, has residents talking this week that after a couple of articles in the Daily News drew increased attention to an ongoing problem around the city.

From unleashed dogs wandering the city’s parks and streets to abandoned or wild cats and dogs roaming around the city, the troubles have apparently arrived on the radar of city council.

The Wednesday paper had details on the gruesome attack on the maltese-bicon mix which suffered a number of serious injuries as a result of the attack, both dogs were off leash at the time, a frequent occurrence in the city but one that is none the less in violation of the city’s by law on dog licensing and ownership.

The unfortunate incident came up as council waded into the debate over feral cats and whether there is the need for a ban on certain breeds of dogs in the city.

A solution however may be a costly one for Prince Rupert citizens, with the costs associated with addressing the issue ranging anywhere from $4,000 to $26,000 a year. Ideas that were suggested included trapping sterilizing and releasing or relocating the feral cats, which would cost around$25,000 a year for 100 cats, and would reduce the number of cats over time. There was also an option suggested that the city offer a euthanasia service for the feral cats, which would cost $11,000 a year per 100 cats.

Either option will no doubt provide ammunition for supporters or critics and both we’re sure will be certain to make their opinions heard loud and clear.



Family is stunned after pet is mauled at local park
By Kris Schumacher
The Daily News
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Pages one and three

Dog owners and other residents in Prince Rupert were shocked to hear about the death of a beloved family dog after it was attacked by another dog at a popular hang-out.

Wade and Maria Niesh's maltese-bichon-mix, Springer, died after suffering serious injuries from an attack while it was off-leash at the Rotary Waterfront Park on the evening of Sept. 12.

"I've been going to the waterfront for years with my dog, and I'd never encountered anything like that," said Maria Niesh, who was walking Springer and their other dog with her young daughter when the incident happened.

"A lot of dogs there are off the leash, and I've had my dog off the leash, but if there's other dogs around, I'll put him on it, because you just never know."

Niesh was surprised when another dog attacked Springer, as she didn't have any idea it was coming and didn't hear it's owner calling after it.

"It just came out of nowhere so fast, and everything happened so quickly," said Niesh. "We both ran as fast as we could, but it just wasn't fast enough and we couldn't get there in time."

The owner of the attacking dog did phone later and speak to the Nieshes, to express how terrible he felt about what happened and offered to pay for all the expenses involved. At first, Wade and Maria didn't know whether they would only want to pursue a fine for the attack, or request that the offending dog be put down.

"We really didn't know what to do in this kind of situation, and while it would be unfortunate to see dogs dead because of it, it would be horrible to see another dog die or a child involved somehow," said Maria Niesh.

"I did speak with one of the technicians at the vet, and she knew the dog not to be aggressive, but what I saw was aggressive."

A problem that some people in town have is that while it is a truly sad and unfortunate incident, both dogs were off of their leashes, as are many other dogs that people walk in public places around Prince Rupert.

Citizens, including Connie Meisner who witnessed the attack, are concerned about the number of people disregarding by-laws, and allow their dogs to walk off leash.

"It's a public place, and everyone has to think about other people besides their own dog on their own walk," said Meisner.

"I hope the young child is OK, that must have been very traumatic for that child to witness that," said Meisner.

The Nieshs have been getting e-mails from a number of people in town, and even had some flowers sent to them following the attack. Springer was a well known dog throughout the community.

After considering their options during the weekend and talking to other people, the Niesh family decided to request that the other dog be put down.

"We feel bad about the decision, but at the same time, you don't, and everybody I talk to about it thinks that's what should happen," said Niesh. "Nobody wins in this situation and it's unfortunate, but hopefully it'll save another dog in the future."

For dog owners or residents who don't know the City of Prince Rupert's by-laws concerning dog licensing and ownership, they can be found on the City website and they include: "No person owning or having the custody, care or control of any dog shall suffer, permit or allow such animal to run at large within the Municipality." "Run At Large or Running At Large means being elsewhere that on the premises of a person owning or having the custody, care or control of any dog and is not on a leash under the direct and continuous charge of a person who is competent to control said dog," and "Not withstanding Section 1 I , no person having the custody, care or control of any dog shall suffer, permit or allow such animal to enter into a public park unless such animal is leashed at all times and under the direct and continuous charge of a person who is competent to control it.

City wants to reign-in problem cats and dogs
By Leanne Ritchie
The Daily News
Wednesday, September 19, 2007

Council is trying to put a leash on dangerous dogs as well as looking for solutions to the feral cat problem, but they warned answers will cost money.

Doug Jay, the city's corporate administrator, laid out the city's options and the associated costs at the council meeting last week, and they range from $4,000 to $26,000 a year.

"Coun. Ken Cote has been called about dogs and I have been called several times about cats," said Coun. Joy Thorkelson. "There is an issue here and there is a (cat) disease issue."

"The entire animal control bylaw needs to be reviewed and we should do the whole ball of wax," said Prince Rupert Mayor Herb Pond.

"We should engage in that dialogue. Where that leads us, I don't know."

The city currently has the ability to deal with complaints about neighbours with noisy chainsaws, but they have few tools in place to deal with dangerous dogs, said Pond.

And while people can keep dogs that scare neighbours, they can't keep rabbits, he noted.
"And without a doubt, we have all heard citizen complaints about dog droppings. It's probably the largest citizen complaint," he said.

City staff outlines a number of ways other cities deal with dangerous dogs and feral cats.
Doug Jay, the city's corporate administrator, said the city could regulate dogs based on sex, size, breed and age. Some municipalities have gone so far as to restrict certain breeds, such as pit bulls and mastiffs, while others require additional leashing, fencing and pre-approved signage warning the public of the dog's presence.

"If someone owns one of these dogs, just to have a fence around your property doesn't do it," said Coun. Ken Cote. "I've heard all kinds of reports and that one up on Fourth West, it's like having a grizzly bear in your back yard. It may be fenced in but no one is comfortable with it."
These types of animals need to be caged in a way so that they don't bother their neighbours, he said.

Coun. Tony Briglio said he disagreed with the idea of labelling a specific breed of dog as dangerous.

"There can be real dangerous dogs that fall through the cracks that aren't on this list."
Under the Community Charter, the city can also approve dog-free zones and empower its animal control officer to seize or impound any dog it believes is likely to kill or injure a person.

When it comes to cats, there are fewer examples of other communities with bylaws, said Jay.
Where there are bylaws, these tend to be licencing, mandatory identification, limits on the number of cats per household, requirements that cats be kept under the control of owners, seizure and impoundment of cats at large and fines and penalties for infractions.

While these options may help alleviate some of the concerns council has received about people with too many cats or cats at large, it doesn't address the city's feral cat problem, he said.
"Unlike domestic cats, the difficulty with feral cats is that there are no owners that can be subjected to regulation via bylaws," he said.

The four common approaches the city found include: first of all trapping feral cats, sterilizing them, vaccinating them and returning them to the wild; secondly trapping them and euthanizing (killing) them; thirdly trapping, sterilizing and relocating them; and fourth, doing nothing.
The first three approaches have the general support of the SPCA, Humane Society of the United States and Canadian Veterinary Medical Association among others.

"The major area of agreement or consensus in dealing with feral cats is that the 'status-quo' of non-intervention is not an option as it generally exposes cats to less than humane conditions and for the potential problems that is poses to both domestic cat populations and the potential of posing a mild health risk to the human populations," said Jay.

The cost of trapping sterilizing and releasing or relocating would be $25,000 a year for 100 cats, and would reduce the number of cats over time through attrition. The option euthanizing is $11,000 a year per 100 cats.

Coun. Ken Cote opposed trapping, sterilizing and re-releasing because of the cost saying: "I would consider doing nothing or wait until we are in a position where our coffers are full"
"No matter which options you choose, someone will be upset," said Coun. Joy Thorkelson.

Jay suggested council explore cat licensing and using funds to support a feral cat program.

"If we allow comment from the public, we might get the public's appetite to have cats regulated," said Coun. Sheila Gordon-Payne.

City staff is expected to bring forward a bylaw at an upcoming council meeting that will be made available for public review before being considered by council.

On second thought, let’s just roll the dice

Well, so much for the two step plan towards approving a liquor license for the Chances Gaming Centre. The plans of Prince Rupert City council to hear public presentations this week and vote on the licence next Monday, got taken off the table in pretty quick order on Monday.

.

Council considered a rather thorough report prepared by staff (see pages 9-52 of the Sept 10 agenda for details), which included the opinions of the RCMP, as well as letters of support from local groups and organizations.

According to the TV 7 website, Council then decided to take the advice of Councillor Tony Briglio and get to the voting right away on Monday night. Briglio got things moving along when he was the first to speak out on the topic, as he declared that he was ready to vote on the issue immediately, rather than wait until next week as was originally planned.

.

The remainder of the attending councillors, with the exception of Joy Thorkelson, decided to follow Briglio’s suggestion and voted to offer their blessing to the bid by Chances to gain their license from the BC Liquor board.

Thorkelson had hoped that by allowing for extra participation in the debate on the license, that all aspects of the impact on the community would be heard. It will be interesting to see if there is any public backlash for the quick change of plans, leading to the same day vote. The sudden change of the original plan may lead some to believe that perhaps the process was but a rubber stamp, something that many who may have wished to participate might have felt all along.

The move to vote in one night clears the way for the councillors to have the rest of the month off from council meetings. The regularly scheduled meeting of the 24th of September was previously cancelled as the Mayor and council will be making their way to Vancouver to attend the UBCM convention.

With the liquor licence vote now complete, there is no need for council to gather on the 17th. The next meeting of Prince Rupert's elected council will come up on October 9th, when Council having rested from Thanksgiving dinners, will convene in chambers and regale the city with the developments from their trip to Vancouver.

TV 7’s website provides a report on the debate such as it was, short, sweet and now complete.

From the TV 7 website:

Gaming Liquor Licence
TV 7
Tuesday, September 11, 2007

After listening to both the public and representatives from the Gaming Center...Councilor Briglio got the ball rolling as he said he was ready to vote on the issue now rather than waiting a week as planned. Council then held a vote and passed a resolution to approve a liquor license.

Councilor Thorkelson was the lone opposition to the vote.

Earlier in the day council members toured the new gaming facility and several comments were made during the meeting commending the 13 million dollar project. The new facility is scheduled to open later this month and hopes to attract visitors from all over the world.

Wantage Road Garbage problems get second look from council

The long simmering garbage issue of Wantage road has apparently been given another look by Prince Rupert city council.

The TV 7 website has details on what plans the city is mulling over in order to combat the increasing amount of illegal dumping along the road that runs parallel to Hays Creek past the golf course.

Included in the plans is the possibility of re-opening the dump on Sundays to allow local residents to take their trash to the civic landfill rather than just tossing it out along the roadside.

Rupert Dumping
CFTK TV 7
Wednesday, August 15, 2007

The City of Prince Rupert is talking trash...more specifically... they are talking about garbage and the illegal dumping of it.

City official have decided that it's time to crack down...or at least...curb the illegal dumping of garbage along Wantage Road, which runs on the outskirts of the city.

The city has opted for a multi-tiered approach to addressing this messy problem. They are currently looking into new signs to remind people that dumping garbage along any road is illegal.

Steeper fines for those who don't abide by the rules, and extended hours for those who might have trouble making the current ones. City officials are looking into opening the landfill on Sundays in an effort to remove any possible excuse for such actions.

Is the water getting hot for local councillor?

CFTK TV in Terrace has posted a story, that seems to finally add some substance to the wild rumours travelling around town this week, of a brawl at the Seafest Gardens on Saturday night.

The incident, which CFTK reports involved local Prince Rupert City Councillor Tony Briglio, has yet to result in legal charges from the local detachment of the RCMP, nor the kind of publicity that a high profile incident as this normally would.

Until now, the story had been the domain of talkers at the numerous city coffee shops and its on line community for the last four to five days, with each successive telling becoming more intense than the last.

It will be interesting to see what becomes of the situation, whether there will be charges laid and what, if any, fall out from the incident may have on the councillors political career.

Below from the CFTK website, is the story that has become story one in the community this week.

Trouble for Rupert councillor
CFTK TV
Wednesday, June 13, 2007

A Prince Rupert City Councillor could be in hot water after a beer garden brawl at Seafest over the weekend.

Witnesses say Tony Briglio was involved in a fracas and taken away by the RCMP where he was kept in custody for a period of time.

A security guard says he asked the Councillor to leave the beer gardens and he was at first cooperative, but when Briglio returned there was an altercation and police were called. The Security guard says he was bitten on his hand.

Police are not commenting or saying if charges will be laid in connection to the incident.

Professor Pond’s Poli-Sci 101 lesson plan

Attention class, today we examine the political science treatise of Mayor Herb Pond, who uses his weekly pulpit of the Northern View, to provide a primer on politics today as conducted in the municipal theatre.

The Mayor in his weekly column explained how the provincial government had recently patted our town’s politicians on the back for their deft handling of the financial crisis of the last few years. The mayor coined the phrase “The Prince Rupert way” as a form of definition for solid municipal governance in times of trouble.

The Mayor recounted how the Premier of the province had expressed how impressed he was with the leadership exhibited by Prince Rupert council in these troubled times. From those seeds of respect, the Mayor has cobbled together a policy manual of sorts on how to govern, by forging a number of alliances that should in a perfect world benefit the good of the whole.

In the body of his column for the free local weekly paper, he points out how the city didn’t whine when thing went south financially, instead, we are to gather that when the going got tough, the tough got going.

He touched on the local economic development agency which was partnered with Port Edward and has made strides to insert the image of Prince Rupert/Port Edward into the bureaucracies of Victoria and Ottawa. Which we guess is a good thing, but it’s one that hasn’t really translated into any massive insertion of jobs to the local community yet.

Considering that both the two main projects currently on the go, the Container Port and the Gambling Mecca, were most likely going to go ahead with our without the city’s bureaucratic pursuits, we wonder if perhaps a bit more attention to the private sector might not benefit the overall economic climate for the city. Not all jobs are going to come from coffee chats with a cadre of government officials after all, attracting some solid industrial development might go a long way in solidifying our tenuous economic base.

Bureaucracy however was a continual theme of the Mayors column; he suggests that the future will require much more intensive lobbying of out of town politicians and bureaucrats, which he suggests will mean more travel to those centers of power. The quote from his submission “We must travel to the decision-makers more frequently”, we gather means an increase in the travel budget for a mayor, his council and our municipal bureaucrats.

It too is a concept that seems to have often been part of “the Prince Rupert way” as well!

He also tackled the issue of how government decisions are made, pointing out that today many decisions in Ottawa or Victoria are conducted behind the closed doors of a caucus or cabinet meeting, meaning that often our MP’s or MLA’s are not in the room when the decisions impacting on our lives are made. It’s a valid point and part of a democratic deficit that has taken root in Canada.

He may however, wish look closer to home on that front, as we gather that his complaint, is rather similar to one voiced locally by many residents about a city council that still makes a number of its decisions in camera and behind closed doors.

For those that tend to throw their weekly paper in the recycle bin before even looking at it, we Podunkicize the mayors column below, hot from the pages of the Northern view.

All in all, it makes for a fascinating inside look at the way a municipality is governed and a submission that should provide for more than a bit of conversation around the town for the next little while.

For if one thing is certain in Podunk, discussing (sometimes quite intensely) how our elected officials conduct their (and our) business, is also “the Prince Rupert way”.


Mayoral View: the Prince Rupert way is working well
By - Mayor Herb Pond

The Northern View

May 16 2007

Most people know I don’t embarrass easily. But I was blushing when the Premier spoke about the leadership of Prince Rupert City Council to a room full of local government officials gathered in Williams Lake for the North Central Municipal Association’s AGM. It was both inspiring and humbling. I also understood what he was saying.

When this community had been hammered by the worst financial storm imaginable, we didn’t whine about it. We put together an action plan, set about building partnerships and began rebuilding. That’s just the Prince Rupert way, but apparently it’s not as common as we assume.

In this changing world, it is more critical than ever for rural communities to forge strong ties with their federal and provincial counterparts. As big urban centers continue their rapid growth, often at the expense of rural communities, a massive shift of political power is occurring. That’s been well documented. But often overlooked is the fact that the people who comprise those large urban centers have also changed dramatically. They no longer know us.

In the fifties and sixties, most people in the large urban centers either came from rural BC or had family living here. They had a strong sense that the wealth of the province came from forestry, fishing and mining, and that maintaining healthy rural communities was critical to the fiscal well-being of BC and Canada. There was a recognition that a share of revenues should be returned automatically to rural communities. They understood that rural hospitals, schools, airports, etc. might not always make sense on a population basis, but that they were necessities to maintaining the flow of revenue into government coffers.

Today the majority of the population in the dense urban centers has no connection whatsoever to rural B.C. It’s not that they don’t care; it’s that they just don’t get us. The greatest example of this is the universal move to density-driven decision making. How many doctors do you need? Where should the next school go? How long is your airport runway? Simple. Insert the population data, crunch a formula and out comes the answer. And it has worked well in deciding which part of Surrey most needs a new school.

But it has been an abysmal failure in rural B.C., where all too often the answer is ½ a doctor or 1/3 of a runway.

Complicating things further is the parliamentary system of government which we live by in Canada at both the provincial and federal level. All meaningful decisions are made by the governing party behind the closed doors of caucus or cabinet meetings. Which means that no matter how hard our current MP or MLA works, they can’t effectively represent us because they are not in the room when the decisions are made.

All this leads to a new role for local government in rural communities. We can no longer sit back and wait for good things to come, but instead must be active lobbyists for our communities. We must travel to the decision-makers more frequently. We must forge partnerships to increase our voice. And we must stay focused on our message. In essence, the Premier was saying that the community of Prince Rupert has done a good job, and he’s right.

Rather than going it alone, we formed a joint economic development agency with Port Edward and that group has been extremely effective at inserting Prince Rupert/Port Edward into planning at the highest levels in both the federal and provincial bureaucracies. Citizen volunteers are actively and positively representing Prince Rupert on key provincial and federal boards and council has taken active leadership roles in a host of key organizations

In each instance our community’s message is focused and positive. We don’t whine about the past, we talk about our future. It’s the Prince Rupert way… and its working.

Thorkelson calls for more public input into Community Plan

Prince Rupert city councilor Joy Thorkelson spoke out for the populace at council this week as she made another attempt at having the city provide for more consultation with its residents over the Official Community Plan.

The councilor said that it was her understanding that were only two public sessions planned for the public to have a look at the revised vision for the city’s future; sessions that require pre registration and an accounting of what you wish to talk about. So in effect you would be limited to input on just one item of interest and not the plan overall.

Thorkelson is of the opinion that councilors may only be hearing the words of their friends and acquaintances, rather than a wide cross section of the population at large. If indeed there are only two meetings planned and they are strictly controlled as to participation, then the concept of full and unfettered access to the process is suffering.

However, it would appear that she was a lone voice at council last week; her calls for her fellow councillors to rise to the challenge of community involvement did not appear to be received with any great enthusiasm.

This is rather unfortunate. For if memory serves correct, during the last election there was a determined effort of all the candidates at the time to be more accountable and accommodating to the public that they served.

Ms. Thorkelson is only reminding them of that long ago portion of the political debate. It might be wise of the remaining members of council to take note of her counsel.

The Tuesday Daily News provided further details on the Official Community Plan and Councillor Thorkelson’s concerns over the process at the moment.

PUBLIC NOT GETTING ENOUGH INPUT INTO THE OCP
By Leanne Ritchie
The Daily News
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
Page one

City councilor Joy Thorkelson made one more impassioned plea to council to add more public meetings to the Official Community Plan (OCP) Review process, with no avail.

Speaking at city council, Thorkelson said that while councillors may know the opinions of their friends and acquaintances, they really haven’t engaged the public.

“There’s only going to be two public sessions, according to the plan we were presented with on how the OCP will happen. I am wondering if we can extend that if there’s public interest,” said Thorkelson. “I have a list of questions that I am very concerned I won’t get answers to, from the way the process is put together.

The city is expecting to receive a draft copy of its vision for the future - the Official Community Plan update – at its next council meeting May 7.

This includes the input collected from the Quality of Life survey done through focus groups and a telephone survey conducted by Jennifer Wilson Consulting, and technical information gathered by UMA Engineering.

Thorkelson noted there are only two public meetings scheduled for after the draft plan is presented and then the final public hearing before the bylaws are adopted.

“My understanding is… there will be two workshops. You have to pre-register for them and you have to state your interest when you get there. You go to a table and you discuss your interest, which means you only get to discuss one item,” said Thorkelson.”… It’s going to be addressing a plan that will have already come to council for us to comment on and I am having a hard time not having heard what anybody in the community thinks about anything.

Administrator Gord Howie said it is entirely up to council how many public input sessions are held as part of the process.

“Those meetings may not even involve the consultant,” said Howie.

He noted the meeting May 7 is not for council to endorse or reject the plan but simply to hear the information. Public meetings will be held several weeks later, after people have had time to review the document. The city can also accept comment during the regular committee of the whole meetings.

“And the public hearing process can be as long as it needs to be for people to make their comments,” said Howie.

However, no one else on council appeared to have an appetite to schedule any additional meetings.

“I really think that we need to engage people in this and that this can be the most exciting thing we will be able to do. Just to take a consultants’ report and throw rocks at it is not the process I envisioned,’ said Thorkelson.

Many still suspicious of TILMA

April 1st saw both BC and Alberta move closer to harmonizing many of the ways that they do business and conduct trade in Western Canada. The TILMA protocol came into effect on Sunday, a government initiative that stands for Trade Investment Labour Mobility Agreement and depending on who you talk to it is either going to open up brand new markets and opportunities or lay waste to the social safety so carefully guarded for all these years.

As is anything to do with Canadian bureaucracy, it was passed without much information being provided to the public, not that we seemed to be particularly inclined to seek it out in the first place.

Like the Free Trade Agreement of the Mulroney years and NAFTA that followed, it’s one of those government initiatives that has many baffled, though apparently not moved to action just yet.

As we discovered a week or so ago, the prospect of the Agreement coming into effect had more than a few local residents wondering why there hasn’t been much investigation into the program and how it may affect the local municipal structure.

With the program now in effect, The Daily News examined some of the local reaction to the debut of TILMA in the Tuesday paper.

‘FIND OUT HOW DEAL BETWEEN PROVINCES AFFECTS US’
By James Vassallo
The Daily News
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
Page one

Community members are calling on the city to take an active interest in the newly created Trade Investment Labour Mobility Agreement (TILMA).

“Some of the possibilities that (TILMA) can have on municipalities makes my hair curl, and I don’t know enough about it,” said Peggy Davenport during the open session of last week’s council meeting.

“This is a binding agreement which gives investors and individuals the right to sue because of government programs and regulations that may restrict or impair investment.

“I would really feel a lot better if I knew that Prince Rupert was doing it’s own investigation so that we can protect ourselves.”

As of April 1, B. C. and Alberta are responsible for complying with the general rules and special provisions of TILMA, an inter-provincial free trade agreement that supporters say will save the two economies billions by making the movement of goods, services, investment and workers easier.

“I’m appreciating already that we’re (noticing) money coming from Alberta to here,’ said Davenport, who is concerned the agreement may increase the likelihood of private health care locally. “They have lots of money up there and we don’t. They’re beginning to buy property, invest; they’re beginning to look around here. What if they just decide to move in and do their own thing and override what we want because they have the money, they have the investment and they’ll have the TILMA agreement behind them?”

Among changes are that B. C. and Alberta will not require businesses located in either of the provinces to maintain local offices or be residents as a prerequisite to carrying on business.

Alberta and B. C. companies will also be able to bid on an expanded range of government goods and services contracts in both provinces and many commercial vehicles will not longer need additional registration and permits to carry goods across the B.C.-Alberta border. As well, professional requirements for a number of occupations will also be reconciled between the provinces allowing people to work in either B. C. or Alberta. Standards have already been reconciled for acupuncturists, chiropractors, occupational therapists, and water and waste water operators with more professions to become uniform during the next two years.

The agreement could have a wide range of effects. As Coun. Tony Briglio noted, there seems to be just as many positives as there are negatives making it difficult to decide how to feel about the legislation.

“We can’t sell ourselves short in regards to the kids of protections we have, that’s one of the reasons why I think it’s important that we get on to finalizing the Official Community Plan, that in itself is a protection,” he said.

“We ought not to be overly scared of something – what we need to do is get a better understanding of it and through the (Union of B. C. Municipalities) is one way to do that.”

Mayor Herb Pond, a UBCM director, was asked to bring back any information on the agreement as it relates to municipalities.

Following a two year transitional period, TILMA will be fully implemented on April 1, 2009.

Quality of Life study results released

Monday night Prince Rupert City Council and those that sloshed through the snow learned details of the Quality of life survey that Jennifer Wilson Consultants conducted between November 13 and February 21.

The findings were to be posted on the City of Prince Rupert website and a review of the council meeting and the presentations can be found at princerupert.com.

Roughly 475 Rupertites participated in the survey designed to be part of the review of the city’s Official Community Plan.

In Monday’s Daily News, the paper provided some background on the survey and what it was to produce for the city.

QUALITY OF OUR LIVES UNDER MICROSCOPE
By Leanne Ritchie
The Daily News
Monday, March 19, 2007
Page one

The city has completed a study that will help planners ensure a good quality of life for current and future citizens.

Jennifer Wilson, of Jennifer Wilson Consultants will present the findings from the City of Prince Rupert’s Quality of Life Community Plan Project at a special meeting tonight at city hall at 7 p. m.

The idea behind the project was to ensure future planning is based on a community-wide perspective – not drive by the loudest voice, nor limited to self-interests, nor constrained to those who typically get involved.

Between November 13 and Feb. 21, local people were consulted about four elements – the community’s definition of quality of life and what the essential ingredients are, the level of personal satisfaction with how the vision is being achieved, areas that are working well and need to be retained, and serious issues needing to be addressed.

Around 475 people participated in a random community-wide survey and 20 community meetings.

According to the results, 10 specific attributes were identified as essential to good quality of life – six attributes measured personal satisfaction in terms of living in Prince Rupert, civic pride, and optimism about the city’s future. Residents identified 17 attributes as performing well and 22 serious issues were identified as being highly inadequate – serious detractors from quality of life in Prince Rupert and in things that are in need of improvement.

The report is part of the city’s Official Community Plan review and will also be used in future years to help assess whether Prince Rupert is changing for the better.

The full report is available at City hall, on the city’s website (http://www.princerupert.ca/), the library and the Economic Development Office.

Perhaps what is needed is a catchy phrase

The multiplying pot holes of Podunk have apparently not gone un-noticed at City Hall. Possibly weary of citizens stopping them on the streets, City Councillors approached the issue last Monday at the regular council meeting.

The city trying to head off a hot point with its citizens has decided to get a little pro active when it comes to the holes that test the best of your car’s suspension.

They are urging folks that have come across a pothole that needs repair to contact them at 627-0960 with details.

Now clearly what is needed is a catch phrase that tells us what the line is all about.

So we offer up Herb’s Hotline of Holes or perhaps Pond’s Podunkian Pothole phone line!

Browse through the following article from Friday’s Daily News and maybe come up with your own description, leave your creation in our comments section below.

CITY TRIES TO PUT PATCH OVER ROAD CONCERNS
By Leanne Ritchie
The Daily News
Friday, March 16, 2007
Page Five

The winter weather is making the bumpy ride on city roads worse and the city can’t do much repair work until it improves.

“With the potholes and the road condition in town right now, for our current citizens and people coming to tour the city and potentially move here, it doesn’t look very appealing right now,” said Coun. Sheila Gordon-Payne. “I know the city is working hard I am just wondering what the plan is, how to report the worst potholes?”

Gord Howie, the city’s chief administrative officer, explained that with all the freezing and thawing that has been going, it has been a very difficult winter for work crews.

“There is a crew that actually does a (pothole) inspection almost every other day — Mondays Wednesdays and Fridays,” he said. “Again, because of the difficult weather, all we can use right now is a hot patch and hot patches tend to, after a week or so, unravel again.”

A hot patch is a mix that’s made on the spot in the back of a pick-up truck.

He suggested that if people come across a pothole, they contact the city’s development services department at 627-0960.

“We encourage that, so we can do the worst ones as quickly as we can,” he said.

In addition, Civic Pride, a community group that focuses on keeping the community looking good, had inquired how people should handle the situation if they have a neighbour with a unsightly home or a business.

They were told the city’s bylaw enforcement officers react to incoming complaints.

To report a complaint, call 624-6825.

Proposed Manufacturing zone, economic bonus for the region or Trojan horse?

A seemingly innocent request to work have Prince Rupert work better together with Prince George and Edmonton has created as many questions as it proposes to answer.

City Council gave approval to a memorandum of understanding that would link the three communities in economics and politics in order to benefit from the Fairview container port.

In the memorandum, the three cities will work together to promote the regional Manufacturing zone between Edmonton and the coast. Both Prince George and Edmonton have been following up on plans for inland ports to take advantage of the beach head in Prince Rupert for world trade.

Proposed by Jim Rushton of Prince Rupert and Port Edward Economic Development, the plan is to increase the ties east to west along the highway 16 corridor.

And while that may seem like a natural evolution and welcome change in direction for regional affairs, the suggestion has come with a bit of built in controversy.

One of the key aspects of the proposed manufacturing zone is something known as the Trade Investment Labour and Mobility Agreement (TILMA), a provincial agreement signed by Alberta and B.C. to promote inter provincial trade. It’s a rather mysterious piece of work between the two provinces, which has quite a few critics suggesting that the province’s best interests aren’t served by the arrangement.

One local person who shares those concerns is local councillor Joy Thorkelson, who was the lone dissenting voice on the vote to approve the memorandum of agreement last Monday at council.

Her thoughts on the issue, put her at odds with the rest of council and with Rushton, who fears that the Northwest “may not become a route of choice” if the manufacturing zone is not in place.

While little debate was given to the issue this week and less information about TIMLA was provided, it most likely will remain an issue locally.

If an agreement is going to have an impact on the region, we would be best served to have all the facts presented for us either for or against, rather than just taking the word of a few folks that it’s all well and good and for our benefit.

We suspect that as things move forward on the proposed manufacturing zone, we’re going to learn a lot more about TILMA and any impact that it may have on our local economy. Allowing the people of the Northwest to become better informed on the situation.

A quick Google search of the term TILMA brought up a few theories on the benefits or problems that the agreement offers, the negative reviews seeming to outnumber the positive ones at this point.

From a blog called Relentlessly Progressive Economics: The Devil wears TILMA

Over at the Fraser Institute they offer up: TILMA: An extraordinary Achievemen for Albert and BC

The Council of Canadians offers up: Another acronym to learn, another trade agreement to fight

Minstry of Economic Development website has the official story: Joint BC/Alberta Agreement

The Briar patch magazine blog provides: Ralph's last laugh

The Canadian Centre for Policy alternatives weighs in with: The myth of interprovincial trade barriers and TILMA'S alleged benefits.

Canadian Dimensions/Georgia straight article: TILMA Is Bad news for environment policy

As you can see there's lots to read, lots to digest. Much of it Greek to the casual reader.

For those with a fair amount of time on their hands there are as many articles pro and con as you could ever hope to find, lots of information is there for the browsing at the click of your mouse.

But for now, we’ll make do with the local feedback from the article the Daily News provided in Friday’s newspaper. We'll tackle the heavy reading as the months progress!

NEW MANUFACTURING ZONE TOUTED
By Leanne Ritchie
The Daily News
Friday, March 16, 2007
Pages one and three

Prince Rupert, Prince George and Edmonton will be working together to take advantage of economic development opportunities along the Northwestern corridor.

On Monday night, council signed a memorandum of understanding that links the three communities in their efforts — both economic and political — to benefit from the development of the Fairview Container Terminal.

“We have all concluded that working together is the best way to try and get what we can out of it,” said Jim Rushton, manager of Prince Rupert Port Edward Economic Development, who presented the document to council.

“The main benefit that comes in the long term from building the container port is that communities along the corridor have the ability to tap into the markets in Asia. When you harness the powers of British Columbia and Alberta, we have a great opportunity to build a manufacturing zone between Edmonton and Prince Rupert.”

The foundation for the agreement was laid more than a year ago when a delegation from the City of Edmonton and then another the City of Prince George visited Prince Rupert.
The delegations included representation from senior city staff, politicians, airport representatives, and members of their respective economic development commissions.
Since then, the city has had more contact and worked more closely with Edmonton and Prince George than ever before, said Rushton.

“There seems to be a strong feeling in Edmonton that what happens in Prince Rupert and what happens in the Northwest along the corridor has a great impact positively for them, so they are willing to invest. It’s a good kind of partnership for us to be involved in,” he said.
There are developments related to the Fairview Container Port taking place in both Prince George and Edmonton in the form of inland container-handling and stuffing facilities for products such as specialty grains.

The idea along the Northwestern corridor is to use the empty containers travelling back to Asia as a way is to diversify economy and move away from simply being involved in primary resource extraction.

“It’s very important Prince Rupert, Prince George and Edmonton have their act together,” said Rushton.

“We will not be a route of choice if we can’t deliver.”

Some areas where the three cities have agreed to collaborate include promoting the entire region to the world — it’s a market with more than two million people and vast resources — combining the strengths of the education institutions, working together to attract labour to the region and drawing people east-to-west for tourism and travel.

However, the agreement also included several mentions of the Trade Investment Labour and Mobility Agreement (TILMA,) a provincial agreement signed by Alberta and B.C. to promote interprovincial trade.

Coun. Joy Thorkelson was not impressed, given the impact of TILMA on municipalities remains unclear.

“The city has spent no time debating this and I am not even sure they know what this is about,” said Thorkelson.

“I don’t have a problem with the rest of the agreement but I do have a problem with that.”
She noted both the Chartered Accountants of B.C., Union of British Columbia Municipalities, and the City of Burnaby have expressed concerns about the impact of the agreement.
“I would feel better if we expressed our concerns. I think we are foolish to strengthen something we may want to weaken.”

However, Rushton said that the implementation of the agreement at the municipal level is still under discussion. The city, through its memorandum, will have the opportunity to get in on the ground floor of those discussions.

“We’ve been taking with the Ministry of Economic Development for British Columbia, which has this file and they are quite excited about this relationship we are developing.

“It is in line with the relationship they are developing between the two provinces.”

He added that TILMA doesn’t come into effect for municipalities for 2009 and the reason for the two-year delay is to allow municipalities time to work out how they will participate.

“We have inserted ourselves into a process of how it might work. I have taken the view personally that I like to be on the inside these days and help shape things. Because we have acknowledged the agreement, we have got ourselves on the inside and we will have some impact on how it actually works. It was not a mistake to include that because it has us into a couple of doors that may be beneficial down the road.”

The rest of council seemed to agree with Rushton.

They voted to sign with agreement with Thorkelson voting against because of the inclusion of TILMA.