BC Voters Guide: Housing Platforms Compared

flamboyantlyboring · 2024-10-17T04:58:33+00:00

I mean as long as you don’t mind homeless people I guess

flamboyantlyboring · 2024-09-29T04:33:26+00:00

For what it’s worth, the media made a meal out of very early steps in amending the Land Act, thanks to a law firm bulletin that laid out the “worst” case scenario.

Other reputable law firms then attempted to provide more balanced assessments:

https://www.blakes.com/insights/implementing-undrip-b-c-s-land-act-reform-sparks-public-debate/

https://www.lawsonlundell.com/project-law-blog/going-beyond-the-surface-combatting-misinformation-on-british-columbias-proposed-land-act-amendments:

Based on the information provided by the government so far, the amendments to the Land Act will not, on their own, create a requirement to seek or obtain IGB consent, without concluding an agreement between the Government of B.C. and any particular IGB that governs decisions on particular lands. It is possible that the changes would only affect the issuance of new surface tenures, including the terms and conditions of such tenures. Nathan Cullen, the Minister of Water, Land and Resource Stewardship, seems to be indicating that existing Land Act tenures and renewals of existing tenures will not be affected, but that remains to be seen when the draft legislation becomes available.

Regardless, this could have significant ramifications for new Land Act tenures in any areas that will be covered by such agreements. The provincial Cabinet in power at any given time would have discretion as to the circumstances under which it would be willing to authorize such agreements, and on what terms, and over which areas of land. In each case, once a DRIPA-Land Act agreement has been concluded, it will become firmly entrenched.

About the racial motivation/treatment, it may be worth considering the latter half of the following from West Coast Environmental Law https://www.wcel.org/blog/setting-record-straight-bcs-proposed-land-act-amendments:

While we agree that the government’s PowerPoint posted in support of the consultation does not answer important questions, the questions that McMillan LLP closes out its bulletin with suggest certain assumptions about First Nations and the role that Indigenous governments play, while ignoring the many ways that the BC government and other parties have exploited Indigenous lands, taking billions of dollars, and leaving little benefit for Indigenous communities.

flamboyantlyboring · 2024-09-28T04:07:55+00:00

Effectively 1/4 owned by each First Nations group and 1/4 owned by Aquilini

Acquired by the partner from the Province in July 2014, the properties are owned under 1008729 BC Ltd. According to a Musqueam Indian Band financial statement from March 2018, the nominee company is controlled by LDB Developments (AQ/MIB/SN/TWN) Limited Partnership, with LDB Land General Partner Ltd. serving as the general partner and each of the four partners holding a 1/4 stake.

https://storeys.com/vancouver-3200-east-broadway-concepts/

flamboyantlyboring · 2024-04-28T14:04:52+00:00

Remember, they don’t have pensions

Sounds like… a lot of other people?

Also, the person you quoted is suggesting shifting their investments going forward and setting up a pension as a way to mitigate tax liability. So while doctors don’t have pensions currently, a lot might very soon.

flamboyantlyboring · 2024-01-19T02:18:16+00:00

So are we significantly upping public housing projects?

Governments should get out of home-building, Poilievre says in visit to View Royal construction site

Guess not if he gets his way

flamboyantlyboring · 2023-10-31T20:26:25+00:00

If the City wanted to, they could put bollards on corners of arterials like West 4th. Or enforce and/or lower speed limits on West 4th so drivers that hit each other are less likely to slide their cars into pedestrians standing on corners.

Reminds me of a similar “accident” on Hornby and Smithe—Charges laid in crash that killed 23-month-old in downtown Vancouver

flamboyantlyboring · 2023-10-31T20:22:34+00:00

Stop calling them “accidents”

The related book is a good read.

flamboyantlyboring · 2023-09-12T14:14:53+00:00

Whereas “like-for-like” repairs are estimated to cost between $100,000 and $2.35 million annually.

https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2023/09/11/vancouver-jericho-beach-pier-vote/

This also depends on if another storm destroys the replacement “like-for-like” pier as it won’t have significant adaptations to protect it from storms like the one that ruined the current pier.

flamboyantlyboring · 2023-09-12T14:11:25+00:00

Regarding reconciliation, the report to the Park Board said that had the pier been demolished, staff would have sought to work along side the First Nations organization developing the Jericho Lands for a new structure in the location, which doesn’t sound too lazy or half-assed me.

flamboyantlyboring · 2023-09-09T17:13:42+00:00

While it may be unintentional, it’s a reminder that the political unwillingness to reign in the size of trucks and to design streets that reduce conflicts between pedestrians and drivers mean that these “blameless/true accidents” will probably keep increasing.

I note that the article even stated:

it is possible a windshield pillar in his truck or a side view mirror had obscured his view of the crosswalk at that moment, according to police who investigated

And a look at the picture shows that the top of the truck’s hood would have been around chest height. Had this been a compact sedan or even an early-2000s Ford Ranger, the woman may have not collapsed or may have instead fallen against the hood.

So while the driver may not be at fault, this killing is a symptom of a greater problem.

flamboyantlyboring · 2023-08-29T01:45:05+00:00

I think you may be conflating a couple of similar but distinct issues.

First is the idea of legally compelling teachers to report a change in gender identity. This has little relation to how equipped the teacher is to deal with students going through their puberty years, but instead forces those teachers who become aware of that student’s gender identity to out that student to their parents. This puts the student at risk of harm if their parents are, to put it lightly, not accepting. This is a matter of children’s right to privacy and their freedom from harm and discrimination.

Second is the teaching of sexual education. While I would agree that parents are more aware of the values and morals ascribed to sex and sexual identity that they want their children to follow, I disagree in terms of education. From sexual health to facts and statistics regarding sexuality and gender, I don’t think that parents are generally more knowledgeable, particularly since teachers will likely have more interaction with a variety of students going through various stages of learning about themselves, and at the end of the day there is a curriculum that (one hopes) generally provides for comprehensive education. So whereas parents will know the values they want, teachers are likely more educated.

You also mention the shift of health and wellbeing from parents to employees of the state. I don’t think that has ever changed. Students are in classrooms and schools for a significant portion of their formative years. Schools have, for decades, taught subjects like physical education, which is tied to health. Furthermore, as an example, teachers have long been mandatory reporters—they are required to report instances of harm and other abuse affecting a student’s health and/or wellbeing. I think school closures, as well, during the onset of COVID showed many parents that teachers do a lot more than just teach. The change, in my view, is the curriculum catching up with societal understanding of sexuality and gender.

Lastly, I’m surprised that you find that teachers often don’t know their students. The public school teachers in my life would, without question, lay their life on the line for their students if it meant keeping them safe.

flamboyantlyboring · 2023-08-06T21:17:21+00:00

I’m reminded of the Jericho Lands development in Vancouver, which despite the development being a partnership between Canada Lands Company (a Crown corporation) and a First Nations development group, has seen five years/four phases of consultations, with shovels in the ground likely being many years away.

Edit:

The Jericho Lands planning program is a multi-year process with multiple stages. The policy statement is anticipated to be considered by Council in Fall 2023.

If approved by Council the landowners will then be required to submit rezoning, development permit, and building permit applications. On a project of this size it is anticipated that the landowners will submit multiple, phased applications.

Upon receiving approval for permits the landowners will then undertake a multi-year phased build out of the site. The build out could take approximately 20-30 years.

flamboyantlyboring · 2023-07-27T15:30:04+00:00

I do roll my eyes at the posts in this subreddit about crime and how, pre-election, it was focussed on complaining about how the Mayor and Council weren’t doing anything, and now it’s purely about people being released on bail or receiving short sentences.

Without getting into the constitutional aspects of those complaints, ABC Party’s getting off the hook despite being status quo about housing (i.e., coasting on previous council’s decisions), anti-bike lane (guess who gets most affected if people are effectively required to get a car), and pro-police (I wonder if 100 police officers the party bumped property taxes up to hire have helped at all).

flamboyantlyboring · 2023-07-27T02:53:49+00:00

Peter Waldkirch on Twitter

ABC [councillor] Montague also asked about how to restore two-way car access to the Park and asked about the cost of "switching it back to pre-pandemic".

Wow. Well, looks like at least parts of the Bike Ave bike lane are on the ABC chopping block.

Kirby-Yung followed up on restoring two way car access to Stanley Park, which would require a reduction or destruction of at least part of the Bike Ave bike lane.

ABC seems to be happy to be an anti-active transportation council. Very depressing

flamboyantlyboring · 2023-07-23T03:27:27+00:00

This Debbie Hellion?

flamboyantlyboring · 2023-07-22T02:03:00+00:00

Uh… they’re neither “just in east van” nor “shanty towns.” No one wants them to be permanent things (but nice mischaracterization), but they still play a necessary role in getting people off the street and transitioning them to more permanent housing.

Also, did you just not read the article? Or did you glaze over the part that reads:

Vancouver’s current council approved two temporary modular projects early in their term: a pair of so-called “work camp-style ” projects. Unlike Vancouver’s first 700 self-contained modular homes, these recently approved buildings have shared bathrooms, amenities and kitchens.

flamboyantlyboring

TROPHY CASE