Election and site update
Posted by Steven Hurdle on November 16, 2008
It’s been a long, but frequently rewarding, few months. After the results were announced, the post-election party for volunteers, picking up lawn signs until 3AM, a short nap, then rebuilding my personal blog and the Langford Team websites (which had both been taken down on election day in conjunction with the spirit of the election laws which don’t allow advertising on election day), it’s taken a while to get to Inside Langford. So here’s a quick post with links to election results and commentary for the time being.
Election results are available here. The Goldstream Gazette, the Times Colonist, and the Victoria Vision blog all have articles on the election, for those who haven’t seen them yet.
Cheryl McLachlan agreed to moderate Inside Langford during the last several weeks, and I thank her for that. I’ve agreed to take on the role of moderator again, as with the election behind us I’ll have time for it again. Though I didn’t comment on it at the time, a commenter noted that my role as the “Langford watchdog” was valuable and wondered why I would give it up by running for office. The simple answer is that people asked me to run, so I did. With it behind me, there’s an opportunity to focus both on some long-ignored personal and professional pursuits as well as blogging about Langford news.
Congratulations to everyone who ran, whether they came first or thirteenth. Democracy needs people to get involved, and we all did and that’s something to be proud of. As I see it, the challenge for our newly elected Council is to engage the public in such a way that three years from now we have a lot more than 20% of people voting. Had I won and about 20% voted I wouldn’t be any much happier than having lost and about 20% of people voting. My goal was to reach out to that approximately 80% of voters that didn’t vote last time, and that 80% not voting again is my failure, and it’s a failure shared amongst all the candidates. Is it the fault of the candidates? The electoral system? The media? The way campaigns are run? Was it too nasty and it turned people off, or was it the reverse and people weren’t concerned enough to get out to the polls? This is the question I am asking myself, and this is the question we must all wrestle with I believe. Our democracy will not be healthy if every local government election is fought over trying to win a majority of 20% of voters.
Pat said
The only place where success comes before work is in a dictionary. All of the elected Council has done the work.
R.J. said
If society would turn off their big screen televisions we would probably see more of them.
Congratulations to you and the rest of The Langford Team for running a great campaign. The Langford Team played a vital role in the 2008 Langford Municipal Election. Well done.
Keep them honest.
Brenda Faubert said
As I have said before,you people did an awesome job. A lot of hard work was involved here.I have just read the remark fron Denise in the TC,quote:
‘Veteran councillor Denise Blackwell unofficially topped the vote getters with 2,264. And she acknowledges she’s relieved that Hurdle didn’t make the cut. “Quite frankly, yes,” she says. She said Hurdle would come to council and get information but then give the “opposite” information to the public.’.
How low can a supposedly ‘educated’ woman go? She may have schooling, but was never ‘educated’.That certainly is not an ‘educated’remark.
Rather a down right lie.I just hope there is an opinion on this in the TC or else a letter to the TC would be appropriate.
I have heard and seen the work that you,as a team have been doing ( my daughters’ involvement as well ),that I feel also that the whole team must be classified as liars. So,this remark reflects,not just on Steven,but on everyone.
The truth will prevail and there words will definitly come back to haunt her,one day
Keep up the good work,you are certainly doing a tremendous service,not only for Langford,but for my family and especially my grandchildren,who need to know that ‘honesty is the best policy’. Our leaders,by your example,of tomorrow.
Barb said
My take on the 20% turnout based on conversations around town: what’s the point of voting in Langford? The mayor is going to make his own decisions and our opinions aren’t important to him in any way. I think Langford politics are as close as you can get to a dictatorship in Canada. Steven: please keep up this blog. You are doing such a good service not only to Langford, but to all the communities in the CRD with your up-to-date information and great comments.
Teresa Ackroyd said
To me Ms. Blackwell’s comment just shows how completely unwilling she is to work with anyone who may question her team’s objectives. She is just so happy her own butt was saved that she can’t see how many people are unhappy.
Carl Nemons said
Take your blinders off Brenda. I could quote you about 10 lies that “your team” either spread or endorsed but at the moment have beter things to do with my time.
What Hurdle did was always twist information just like the papers do to support their own agenda.
By the way, next time you enjoy one of the many, many qualities of life that Langford offers thank “The Langford Team” for not being strong enough to get even one seat on council.
Lenny said
Yah, with 22% showing up, it looks like a few of Steven’s friends and ALL of Les Bjola’s all came out. I was rather annoyed at that good friend of Council mr. Wade got in.
Is it democracy when one special interest group (developers) control the council in a town so completely? With only a 22% turnout, all you have to do is tell all your contractors and employees that they need to vote for the incumbents if they want to keep their jobs (scare tactics) and you have full control over the outcome.
What a disgrace, it appears Langford is quite happy with living under a dictatorship, so long as it keeps their taxes as low as possible.
Robert said
80% voter turnout will never happen because only 20% really care what goes on in their community. Barb’s comments that people didn’t vote in Langford because it is “as close as you can get to a dictatorship in Canada” are incorrect. Take a look at the other turnouts around the CRD or even our national turnout Barb! The majority of those who care about what our wonderful Council and Mayor have done for Langford have spoken and congratulations to them. They have our support and THANKS for ALL their hard work because Langford citizens know that they will continue to serve with pride!
R.
TJ said
First of all I’m dismayed at the negativity on this site (sorry Steven, I respect your opinion, your campaign and your efforts) but this is getting to be a bit much. Now Mrs. Blackwell’s education is being questioned? She’s being accused of lying? What? She expressed an opinion, which she is more than entitled to. She, he, and anyone else should be entitled to an opinion. Everyone has an opinion of who they prefer to work with. We have favorite customers (worked with them for years and absolutely love them!!) As far as Mrs. Blackwells unwillingness to work with anyone…have you stopped and actually read how many different committees Mrs. Blackwell is on? The years and years and years of committee work. I have personally witnessed Mrs. Blackwell listen ad nauseum (my latin’s brutal) to many, many speakers. Some she agreed with, some she didn’t but she did listen and give everyone an opportunity to speak. I was once at a meeting at 11 15 pm (yep pm) with speakers, still speaking and she listened to every single one of them! At this meeting, the speakers weren’t even from Langford….she still listened.
As far as people being unhappy…election results kind of speak for themselves. It looks like the unhappy people are posting on Inside Langford. We need, collectively to be more positive. My grandma once told me that you can’t fling mud without getting mud on yourself. Less mud people, more positive. I have to constantly remind myself how lucky we are, we live in a beautiful community, in an amazing country and are very lucky to be here. Every day is a gift…don’t waste it.
K.M. said
Regarding:
“…what’s the point of voting in Langford? The mayor is going to make his own decisions and our opinions aren’t important to him in any way. I think Langford politics are as close as you can get to a dictatorship in Canada.”
I realize that some of us are very unhappy with how some things have been handled in Langford. However, regardless of the percentage of people who voted, it was still the majority. I guess people are happy with our municipality’s direction and vision and therefore went out and proved it with their vote. To be clear though, we cannot accuse our local politics as being run as a dictatorship.
For those who are unhappy, and didn’t get out and vote…please stay quiet until the next election. We want people who actually act upon their convictions not just complain.
Teresa Ackroyd said
http://www.canada.com/topics/technology/science/story.html?id=0218b5d4-a486-468d-acd7-e1b7fd0474f6
This is a good example of the things that worry me. Maybe I need a better hobby to fill my time, but it makes me ill to think how my generation has raped the earth. Our rampant need to ‘develop’ everywhere, to ‘improve’, to get that bigger house, bigger car, exotic landscaping (that uses too much water for our microclimate), cooler gadgets. Canadians are 7th in the world in resource use and abuse, the supply is not infinite, and everyone else is playing catchup. Does having nice paving stones on Goldstream seem a good trade-off for stripping entire hillsides down to bare rock for more houses? The argument that Skirt Mountain was going to be logged anyway holds no weight, at least logged land can be reclaimed again. I wish there were a way to put a dollar value on the options we have lost, so these people who keep touting our zero tax increase can see just how much that has truly cost us globally. These local developments may seem a drop in the bucket but multiplied over the country and over the continent they make a huge impact, and we all contribute.
Jes said
I think the Langford team (and Ryan Hinton) ran a good campaign and have talked to many people from my neighborhood (some of whom even voted) that are dissapointed yet unsuprised that they didn’t make it in.
I think the key to the apathy in Langford is the perception of the mayor and council as an unyielding cabal. This unfortunately may only be reinforced by the outcome of this election despite the strong showing of the contenders.
What we have here is a failure due to lack of imagination.
Steven Hurdle said
I essentially agree with this statement, but I think the significance for me is different than it is for you. But that’s the part that surprises me. I expected both the Langford Team and the incumbent slate to get more votes. Are you telling me that only 13% of eligible voters thought the incumbents were doing a good enough job that it was worth their time to get out and vote for them, despite them seeing the strongest challenge the status quo in Langford has faced to date and the biggest risk to the status quo yet? I find that unfathomable. It is well known that my vision of Langford differs from that of the incumbents in several areas, and I am not impressed with being told that I send out misinformation (which I do not: Ms. Blackwell and Mayor Young may wish to consider that two people can look at the same facts and come to two separate, but both potentially valid conclusions, and I grant them the benefit of the doubt in this regard even if they do not return the favour to me). But I thought that more than 8% would vote for change, and that this push for change would get more than 13% out to vote for the status quo. The fact that neither materialised is what shocks me.
As I said on CBC Radio this morning, I will not sugar coat the results, or try to suggest that the results are somehow invalid because the turnout was low. However, it stills begs the question: if Langford Council is doing such a good job, why did only about 13% of eligible voters support them? And if they’re doing things that concern so many voters, why did only 8% oppose them? And to those who say it’s a big problem everyone, consider that Langford was essentially tied for lowest votern turnout in the Capital Region (with two municipalities having voter turnout of above 50%). The fact that it’s a problem everywhere doesn’t change the fact that it’s quite a bit worse here than some places.
Steven Hurdle said
I believe your comment does not meet the comment posting guidelines as I believe it’s defamatory. However, I am going to experiment with something a little different and give you 36 hours to prove that it’s a statement of fact rather than a defamatory statement. If you cannot, then I will remove your comment. Needless to say, I do not knowingly spread untruths of any kind and stand by my statements. Since I make them very publically, and submit them to peer review here since anyone may comment on Inside Langford if they follow some very basic rules (that are applied equally to all visitors), if I was making statements that were false it would be very easy to call me on them. Denise Blackwell’s comments to the T-C are not accurate, and not legitimate, IMO. I note with interest that if she is both aware and concerned about what I’m saying, it’s strange she doesn’t bring them to my attention. A quick email would not take her very long, and it would be a valuable use of her time if it would potentially alleviate her concern about what she portrays as misinformation. I’m very approachable, prepared to accept corrections when appropriate (no one is perfect), and open to new interpretations. Twice in the past I have made corrections on Inside Langford when requested, once at the request of Langford City Planner Matthew Baldwin, and once for Les Bjola. They both took the time to contact me with a concern, and in both cases I agreed with the information they presented. I believe it’s unfortunate that she’s prepared to call my honesty and integrity into question in the media without seemingly making any attempt whatsoever to first raise her concern with me. I have certainly stood before her in Council Chambers and raised my concerns before her.
Carl Nemons said
Is the glass half full or half empty? Depends on your point of view. It should be said that maybe the non voting public are so happy that they refuse to believe anyone could possibly want something so they don’t bother voting. I truly believe that if 75% of voters had of voted you would have had an even higher percentage voting for the present council. “Langford Team” may not always agree with the process but you can’t deny their success.
I saw this mentioned before;
If Langford was a cooperation and you had your hard earned money invested in it (taxes). Every recreation facility and amenity are your profits or dividends.
Who would you want as your board of directors? The present councilors or “The Langford Team”
Nobody has stepped up to the plate to comment on this analogy yet. Who will be the first. I dare you.
Ann Cochlin said
I don’t want to read a bunch of nasty personal remarks on here, especially not bigoted ones. I’m definitely in favour of deleting those.
Discussing public policy and decisions made in the public interest makes for interesting debates – no need for slander.
P>JM Says said
Sorry Guys you did not make it this time.Better luck in the future.Like Barrack Obama in the USA We need change in Langford And for.much the same reason. Our present adminstration are stone deaf to the needs of the less fortunate They seem to belive in a “Trickle down economy”Look after they will take care of the Poor Sorry it has been tried and we know the result.
D McLeod said
Geez, Steven, for somebody who has mis-stated information on this very site you’re a bit touchy aren’t you? I speak of course of your claim that there had been no rental units built in Langford only to have addresses and capacity’s related right back to you. The problem is that once one gets into politics one is responsible for what one says and to blame it on a source just doesn’t cut it. Its your own responsibility to check it and make sure its accurate particularly when it involves an accusation against someone else’s achievements. I daresay your comment above would hold more weight if you were equally agitated about the negative comments made against Ms. Blackwell or the Mayor – are you going to delete comments considered to be negative aginst them too?
As you point out, the defeat for the “Langford team” was resounding but I’m not sure I agree with your reasoning for it. While sour grapes are in evidence after every election, Federal, Provincial or Municipal, those that leap to the conclusion that Langford residents are content with a “dictatorship” clearly miss the point. A few days ago, if they thought it was one, they had a chance to change it and chose instead to heartily endorse the system and people that were doing what they clearly considered to be a good job. Generally, municipal elections don’t get a large turnout because at that level most people are satisfied with things the way they are, at least in this country. Macro economics, heath care and natl defense are not issues solved by municipal governments. IN essence Canadian voters, particularly at the Municipal level vote for change and refrain from troubling themselves if they agree with things the way they are. It may not be very complimentry about Canadian’s but it is a fact. The old adage about Canadian voters “voting against a govenrment instead of for one” holds true. If nobody wants to change the status quo they don’t turn out; ergo the support wasn’t the 13% but the roughly 80% who see no reason for a change.
As well, the “Langford Team” got a lot of press this year, both as noted in the TC article by Bill Cleverly (because of the conflict of “visions’ for Langford – I’m not aware of any other team or person running for a council seat that got that type of coverage) and by the number of signs where you teamed up resources etc, as well as the boost provided by this site which, as many have noted, is shall we say, “very friendly” to your positions. Despite the heightened awareness, every member of the “Langford Team” lost, and fairly badly despite our expections as noted above. Not one got on council. It is not therefore that the vocal minority didn’t get a voice, or that it wasn’t heard, it was just that it was rejected rather clearly. Perhaps its time the “Langford team” started trying to help the real team that actually runs the city by subscribing to and helping clarify the issues that are clearly supported by the majority of the voters. To be blunt, the results are saying that if you want to be involved in Langford politics, get onboard the boat and learn how it works – getting dragged in the water behind isn’t going to be much fun, and the majority like the course its on.
Herman Surkis said
Perhaps it is time to post all the comments that the previous moderator has kept back.
Carl Nemons said
Finally some humour! I have to say that was quite a funny comeback and I had a good chuckle. I am sure the poster meant it with some humour as well.
But seriously….
About the phone call to Little Elf. It was one Call. Hardly a threat to their livelyhood. If it is they have more troubles than that phine call. The caller has as much right to shop where he wants to as does the sellers have as much right to support who they want to. The little Elf made this call into a political event hoping to capture more votes for who they support by reporting it to the press. I think it backfired on them. The Caller may have apologised but I doubt if it will change the fact that he or his friends will ever shop there again.
The little elf and Vern Trew have bitten the hands that feed them. A very poor business decision on both their parts. Who here can honestly say they would support someone who does not support them? Or would recommend their friends support them? It is human nature.
Businesses that serve the general public in the capcity that they do usually keep there political ideals to themselves. To boot they put it in the newspaper. Duh!
Steven Hurdle said
An interesting element of this is that the previous moderator made enquiries with City Hall to follow up on that story, I am told, and was told that they were unable to share with her most of the information she was requesting. I also acknowledged the new information when it was made available. A point made, then updated when new information is made available, can hardly be called misinformation. And you promised a list of 10, BTW. You’re down to under 12 hours left, at whcih time the comment will be reclassified as defamatory.
Many comments against Ms. Blackwell, the mayor, local developers, and others have never seen the light of day and never will. I am always amazed that people who do not have access to the comments that are not approved nonetheless appear to think that they do.
My question remains, why was Langford virtually tied for the lowest in the region?
Issues of local land use and local amenities are, which are some of the most important decisions going though. I actually agree that many people consider local government to be the “small time” and provincial and federal the “big time”, and perhaps there was a time that I felt that way. I was wrong, but I was 14 so perhaps that can be forgiven. :) But that is a common perception, and that suggests that both incumbents and challengers were unsuccessful in communicating to the public the importance of their arguments.
As to your points about the media, I have little issue with the media coverage. Despite your suggestion to the contrary, my comments are not sour grapes at all. I don’t agree with your comments about Inside Langford though, especially looking at the incredible job she did on comment moderation, I think Inside Langford was fair and reasoned during the election, almost without exception. In fact, I received some complaints from people over that who wanted it to be more opinionated. However, I intend to maintain a separation between news and opinion, with news in the posts and opinion in the comments where anyone can contribute.
BTW, For the last few days I’ve approved every comment people have made, in the interest in communicating what it might be like if the comment posting guidelines were made looser, while we are discussing that issue. I apologise if I have approved any comments that offended people.
Ann Cochlin said
Disgusting. The city government is supposed to serve the people. What’s this about “biting the hand that feeds them?” Are we dogs now? We’re supposed to wag our tails and beg for scraps, and cringe if the hand is raised? Not likely! Now the calls are starting to other people, those who support a better balance between development and conservation, making similar threats. Will this backfire? Oh yes.
Steven Hurdle said
It is of questionable ethics and legality to stop shopping somewhere as political punishment. Boycotts because the business being boycotted might be breaking the law or doing something ethical is generally supported in case law, but boycotts merely out of political retribution are likely unethical and may be illegal depending on the circumstances.
I would hope people who disagree with the politics of Lynne from Little Elf or Vern Trew from Trew Slinger would nonetheless recognise that they are people who are as patriotic about Langford as anyone could ever be.
And before you suggest it’s just human nature and I’m probably no different, it may interest you to know that I purchase several of the mayor’s Alpine-branded services on a monthly basis despite alternatives existing. I support local businesses over businesses from outside the community, even if I disagree with the politics of the owners.
Ken said
The moderator before the election withheld many comments that were defending council elect, the mayor and ones that were clarifying information, I am sure lots of posters out there can verify that their post were withheld. This site was run as a campaigning tool for the LangfordTeam not a news site. Now that the election is over Mr. Hurdle wants to change posting policy to try and rebuild this site’s and his reputation. I am all in favor of having a site where local issues can be discussed in a neutral and fair manor. I am not in favor of having a moderator that sensors or manipulates information.
Herman Surkis said
Biting the hand that feeds you, etc.
Where to start.
By that standard, everyone who voted for the Langford Team should switch to BFI disposal. We should all stop shopping at every business that displayed Incumbent and Wade signs.
With that attitude, no wonder there was a ton of $99 so called anonymous corporate donations to the incumbents at the last election. They needed to hide their faces in case others were as dispicable as they are.
I also notice that the councils cheering squad is still anonymous. What are you afraid of?
Threats to Little Elf are not a ‘one of’, but typical of much of what I personally head on the street. The difference is that little Elf had the courage to speak up. I wish a third of the people, businesses, that recounted similar stories would have been braver. Perhaps now they will speak up publically. Until such time, it is all hearsay…except for Little Elf.
I personally have had a number of calls and emails thanking me for the “COURAGE” to run against the current council. The word ‘courage’ should not be a word that needs to be used for someone who runs for council. At least not in a Democracy. That is one of my biggest disappointments, that people, and there are a lot of them, feel that it takes courage to run against the current council in Langford. That is very sad!
Once again I should say that I am not hiding behind anonymity in my posts.
I would vote that if the moderator does not have a return email address, then you do not get to comment. Simple.
Jason MacKenzie said
congrats on running a decent campaign. This was my first year voting in langford and I am glad I was able to vote.
To get the numbers up, Langford should consider sending out voter registration cards and allow people to mail in their vote (postage paid). Of course e-voting would be the best but I don’t think Langford is ready for that yet.
I would be interested in the following:
some candidate gets “x”% of the total votes cast. lets say 20% of 100 votes cast
22% of voters voted
so the number can be ratioed such that 20%(candidate)/22%(of eligible voters) = ~10%
Apply this formula to candidates in ridings that got a 50% voter turnout and you might have a better measure of a particular candidates support, moreover, one could determine what would have happened IF langford had a 50% voter turnout
Maybe I am just rambling but I will see you guys a a few council meetings in the future
West Raven said
I find the whole ‘you’re lying’ tactic to be cheap and ridiculous the way that it’s been used in Langford these past years.
I remember when we were trying to raise awareness of what was happening on Spaet and with the interchange, and we put forward a lot of facts, to which Blackwell, Young and council responded ‘You’re lying.’
If you ask these people what exactly they felt to be a lie, and what exactly the truth is, they are less likely to speak.
So far, here, the best answer I’ve heard do far is that Steven Hurdle claimed that no rental units were built, and someone asserts there was.
But I still don’t know what the truth is…
Was there new rental units built?
Did Hurdle ever claim there wasn’t?
The level of discourse in this town is sad. So much angry criticism and so little intelligent debate.
I don’t mind seeing the insults here. It helps me know who the intelligent people are and who the hateful bigots are. I have a scroll button on my mouse and I know how to use it, meaning I am not forced to read these things if I don’t want to.
My one criticism was once last week someone made a good point and I said ‘good point, so-and-so’ or something to that effect and was sent an email by the moderator telling me that my comment was addressed at a specific person and that wasn’t allowed.
That’s a rule you could lose. Why keep us from addressing one another? I like that this is a place we can interact with one another, even if some of the people here are far from polite.
West Raven said
I would rather comments were automatically approved and deleted later then have to wait to see them posted. But that’s just me.
Carl Nemons said
That is your choice Stephen who you buy from. But don’t try to tell the caller it is illegal or unethical if they don’t shop at little Elfs now. He can support (buy from) whomever he choses for what ever reason he choses.
Anne and Stephen..Please point out where in the post it talks about City Government.
The post made is in respone to the callers actions. Please don’t twist or mix words.
What does Alpine have to do with this? Did they post signs somewhere that I missed?
Pat said
Steve how coincidental that after the election you have all of a sudden decided to allow one of my posts, did I ever think you would post that comment, No! Why would I, I have been censored from this site for about two weeks. Please don’t expect anyone to believe that you are now a fair and honest moderator, that will never happen.
Kristina Vanlierop said
Absolutely no one deserves a threatening phone call because of their political opinions.Period.And I am sure the police feel the same way.
There is a basic standard of decency and respect expected of citizens in order for us to function as a society.
Making a threatening phone call is not a right for anyone. If you don’t want to shop there, then don’t.Write a letter of complaint. That’s what upstanding citizens do.
It does make one wonder what kind of powerful allegiance this caller has to the Incumbents to do such a foolish and unlawful act?
Jes said
Just saw on the news that the Provincial Liberals may not even seriously consider the results of the rail referendum, despite the resounding yes vote, due to the abysmal voter turnout. This would be really unfortunate but raises an interesting point.
Oh and I like the moderation experiment. I truly think Cheryl did a heroic job but I like to see peoples true stripes. Perhaps an unmoderated no holds barred forum linked from Inside Langford would be an idea.
Steven Hurdle said
Many people can, and some of them are ardent critics of the Council. I am amazed that so many people who self-identify as supporters of the current Council believe that only their comments get moderated when the reality is drastically far from the truth. You should ask West Raven, Heather Scott, Kristina Vanlierop, Herman Surkis, and several others about that. All of them have either made comments that never saw the light of day, or that went through two or three revisions before finally meeting Ms. McLachlan’s strict standards, and all the comments were critical of the incumbents. And if this site were a campaign tool for the Langford Team, those comments would have all been posted.
And given that your comment makes an unsupported allegation it runs afoul of the comment posting guidelines, but I’m still in an experimental phase about that at the moment as I’m getting lots of interesting feedback.
Steven Hurdle said
Not coincidental at all, I stated publically that I was allowing a broader range of comments for the time being to see how things went. In fact, I’ve approved every comment made (other than a duplicate comment, you’ve got to watch that Herman ;) ) made over the last few days. That ended up including all of yours over that time. I’m not sure why you left the comment if you didn’t want it posted. If you wanted to email me personally my contact information is available in numerous places. You also spoke about me in the third-person which strongly suggested you were speaking to a general audience, not to me specifically. I’m also not sure what the intended purpose of the comment was if you didn’t want anyone other than me to read it.
At any rate, I have removed the comment, and my reply to it. However, for you and for other site readers, all comments left on this site may be published. Please do not use it as a way of contacting me privately as I may not understand that that is your intent, or may choose to approve the comment for that or for another reason.
Ryan Hinton said
If Inside Langford was a campaign tool, the site was not supporting me, as I had comments that were not posted. I think the difference was that some people respected the moderators decision and others simply complained. The moderator set clear guidelines (although I did not agree with them), so it is our own fault if our comments were not posted.
Teresa Ackroyd said
What I would like to see, is the elimination of election ‘by acclaim’ when only one candidate declares.
Say the position is for mayor. The candidate is added to the ballot and has to garner a particular percentage of all votes cast, maybe 20%. So, if a minimum 20% of people voting do not vote for that candidate, the position is not filled officially, but becomes a 7th councillorship and the title of acting mayor rotates between all 7 people.
Jason MacKenzie said
Langford (and other municipalities) need (consecutive) term limits on mayorship and councilors because we need at least fresh looks at the current status of Langford. To be fair, after reaching the term limit, the mayor and council could re-run after sitting out one term. This would allow the community to put them back in control should they desire. It is also highly unlikely, over time, that the whole council and/or mayor would be replaced at once.
Thankfully, the free market should shunt any further housing development (see Bear mountain condo development on hold).
Teresa Ackroyd said
Unfortunately for us common folk here, we are on the hook for that Spencer Road Interchange loan. If the housing market crashes and the property owners default on the loan, all we are left with is the land with the onus on Langford to develop it and recoup the loss.
Pat said
Here’s a better idea, let’s take the person with the least amount of votes and make them Mayor, that will insure that we get the least qualified person doing the job. And for council let’s draw names from a hat. That way we can all end up unemployed with lots of time to protest, bitch and complain.
Anonymous said
Like Ryan I had a number of my comments not appear. But I admit to needing to tone myself down on occasion…a little passionate about what I believe.
Like others I find it difficult not being able to refer to a poster, as that means I would have to copy/paste for my comment to make sense. Frustrating!
As I have said before, there is one poster who has been adamantly in favour of the incumbents, and yet I doubt he has ever been censored. I have in the past stated that even if I may disagree with much of what he says, I am open to discussions with him, and I am open to changing my mind on some issues…if he can prove his point. I would hope that he (initials only so he/she ?) would be willing to be equally as open minded.
Anonymous said
The comment about term limits municipally is good. Would that it happened. But not likely!
It would avoid deadwood getting in on name recognition, time after time. It would avoid a group getting a lock on council. It would as pointed out bring fresh blood and ideas. Even if you are doing good, often people get set in how they are doing things and lose the ability to change direction when times or circumstances dictate.
A group I belong to has done precisely what was mentioned. No director may serve more then 2 consecutive terms, and must skip one term before running again. There is no perfect system, but there are better ones.
Ryan Hinton said
I assume Pat’s comments below were directed at Jason MacKenzie:
(Pat’s comment)
Here’s a better idea, let’s take the person with the least amount of votes and make them Mayor, that will insure that we get the least qualified person doing the job. And for council let’s draw names from a hat. That way we can all end up unemployed with lots of time to protest, bitch and complain.
I do not understand why Pat is unable to engage in intelligent and meaningful discussion and debate. Rather then make sarcastic comments at the expense of someone else, simply express an opinion respectfully.
I do not agree with Jason about having term limits on mayor and council, but his idea is not as obscure as Pat is trying to portray. The US has a two term limit for the presidency, yet, Bush’s replacement will not be the person with the lowest votes or picked from a hat.
We live in a free and democratic society, which allows us to vote for whomever we want. It is up to the people to choose who they want. Let’s not put restrictions on the peoples will.
The current mayor and newly elected council have been chosen by the voters of Langford. I may not think these elected officials are the best people for the job, but they received the most votes. That is the way our democratic system works and it is a pretty good system, though not perfect.
The changes I would like to see to our democratic voting process are ways to increase voter turnout and to lower the voting age.
Teresa Ackroyd said
I wonder how we could get everyone to put their names in the hat though, given only 20% turn out to vote anyway. Maybe set it up like jury duty selection?
Often the best person for the job isn’t the one who applies, but the one whom their peers recognize as skilled.
Teresa Ackroyd said
I am reminded of the favourite stereotype in any story, that of the bully’s sneering sidekick. Often their meanness of spirit is reflected in some physical ugliness, or their anonymous derogatory moniker. They bask in the reflected power of the bully, but all too often they are the first to get the backlash when the bully is finally defeated.
Jason MacKenzie said
Pat, your comment that the person who gets the least votes is the least qualified is ridiculous.
Better to say nothing and be thought a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt.
Pat said
Sorry Ryan, Jason, Teresa but the only comments of mine that clear the moderator are the sarcastic one’s, with the exception of the one today regarding the Focus magazine article which took 4 attempts. Meaningful discussion is impossible on this site, IMO.
Steven Hurdle said
Please identify which non-sarcastic, non-offensive comments you are referring to. I scanned your unapproved comments over the last while and was unable to find any. Tell me what article you were commenting on and the date and time and I will review it.
Actually, I extend that offer to anyone, in fairness. For me to review it please email me, and those of you who didn’t provide an email originally will need to quote the comment the moderated comment to prove your identity.
Anonymous said
If know one is willing to stand up for the job, why should anyone else be considered for Mayor.
I for one, wanted to see some change, not necessarily because present council are doing a bad job, but because I wanted to see some debate, more balanced discussions so I could at least have the illusion that Mayor Young isn’t towing a bunch of yes men/women.
Not everyone in Langford feels the benefits of development outway the destruction. Not everyone is into hockey, soccer, golf, drive blingy SUV’s or even want to live in decadant homes. I suspect, some of the “anonymous”, or not quite so anonymous types of this forum, are in fact realtors, developers and associates that that reep the big benefits of Langford path.
In the end. Democracy didn’t fail. The people in Langford did! With such a pathetic turn out at the poles, what politian can really feel confident they represent the average folks. Why should they, or do they care? A majority of the few who voted obviously had some serious motivation, and were rewarded for it. The rest of us have to suck it up, and take whats coming to us.
Pat said
“realtors, developers and associates”
How about Restaurant employees, Grocery Store employees, Department Store employees, Coffee Shops, Printing shops, Recent and Future New Schools, Government workers … “BIKE SHOPS”…etc, etc, etc. we all benefit from the economy of development whether we are directly involved or indirectly, does anyone out there remember 25% unemployment in Langford, open ditches, auto wreckers all along Millstream, Unsafe roads, Septic field leaching into our lakes? Where is the appreciation for the amazing improvements? You may not like the results of the election but statements like the one above are ignorant. When was the last time someone looked at what a developer contributes to this community? I can tell you it is a lot more then any other community in the region. You can thank your Council for that!
Heather Scott said
Lots of commenters here do give credit where credit is due for some of those things and more. There are some who are opposed to the changes, and some who like the changes, but there is a group in the middle who like the changes but do not like the way they are done, or sometimes they speed they are done at.
I am curious. Several of the semi-anonymous posters here frequently decry how “negative” the critics of the council are. This seems to only matter in their minds when they are being negative towards the council, or towards any of their decisions, as these people who are opposed to negativity are often the most negative of them all. But here is what I am curious about. One of the most positive things I have heard about in years was how the Langford Team helped bring together Tower Fence and Little Elf. Not word one was said about that by the self-acknowledged fans of the current council, other than to say (very negatively, I might add) that they would never shop at those establishments again, etc. Not only is that pretty negative, it’s ignoring an amazing positive, one that totally shocked me.
I think it’s too bad that you are suggesting that negativity is only bad when it’s directed at the current council, but otherwise negativity is fine. It’s a pretty stark double-standard. That’s not the only example, but it’s a pretty notable one.
Pat said
Little Elf and Tower can live happily ever after, I am happy they kissed and made up. It has probably saved the tax payers of Langford $150,000 in legal fees, you are right when you say we should all thank the Langford Team. Now let’s do something positive with that money like bike lanes or bowling lanes, how is that for positive?
Ryan Hinton said
Yes Langford has come a long way since 25 percent unemployment, open ditches, auto wreckers all along Millstream, unsafe roads, septic field leaching into lakes, etc. However, since things were that bad, it wasn’t too difficult to make great improvements.
I am tired of hearing about low unemployment in Langford and vast amounts of new jobs. All of Greater Victoria has the lowest employment in the country. Langford did nothing spectacular; the low unemployment is just a sign of the times in this region. I am sure someone will tell me that our mayor and council are responsible for the low unemployment in all of Greater Victoria.
Yes many jobs have been created in Langford, but most of those jobs are not high paying jobs because they are in retail and the service industry. The jobs created in Langford are not sufficiently employing the people in Langford.
Only 17 percent of working Langford residents live and work in Langford, but across BC, 38 percent of working people live and work in the same municipality. Langford is vastly below average in providing jobs in Langford for the people of Langford. Council should set a goal of bringing that 17 percent up to 25 or 30 percent.
Ernest Black said
Double standards are not new here, and especially with the council cheering section.
Besides as others have mentioned, the council has its built in cheering section. The council is very capable of blowing its own horn, which it does all the time, with our money.
So if ‘insidelangford’ is to serve any purpose it would be to show the other side of what happens. It is to show the underbelly of how things are done. It is to question the propaganda coming from city hall. It is to accept correction on those occasions when an error is made, which by the way the other side has rarely done. City hall almost always spins its mistakes and blames someone else. Or just simply ignores them, not unlike some of the posters.
In fact InsideLangford in my opinion has fallen down on its job of investigative journalism by being too fair, and not looking and stating the other side…harder. For corporate, government cheering section news, there are any number of local and national papers. For a look beyond publicity flack, the places are few and far between. I had hoped that IL would get further up their noses.
I find myself having to agree that the LangfordTeam were beaten 2:1 and Langford spoke by its silence, which makes it worse.
But a number of the public noticed the blatant dirty dealings that went on. The incumbents claim they lost a lot of signs, maybe, the opposition claims that they lost 75%, almost proved, but many in the public noticed that where both groups had signs, Langford Team signs usually were the only ones to disappear, and mysteriously within minutes the empty space was filled with incumbent signs.
Coincidence…perhaps?
Or not!
Hopefully more people who saw this pattern of behaviour will come forward, and give the police licence plate numbers. The more the merrier.
Jason MacKenzie said
I agree with Ryan’s statements that Langford has to improve on the “living wage” jobs that need to come to Langford. Restaurant and grocery store jobs are great but one cannot make enough to buy even a lower priced home in Langford. Government jobs are not in Langford, they are in Victoria and people commute to them. I think the Prov Govt even said that they will not move anyone to langford (which is probably a good thing from the provincial taxpayer perspective).
Thanks for the history lesson Pat, I was not in Langford during the times you speak of. Sounds bad! Overall, I think Langford is in good shape and do thank the council for their efforts, however, do we really need to develop everything and does it all have to be housing development? We are here now, things are the way they are now, its about moving forward. The world is changing and we can’t live in the past which is why I would like to see at least a few new faces on council and perhaps as mayor.
Anonymous said
There is nothing wrong with liking Langford the way it was. The problems it had 25 years ago were not restricted to Langford. Langford was refered to as the “Dogpatch” only by people outside of the community. Many of those within, were actually quite proud of the semi-rural community.
I can remember way back when my Saanich Highschool Rugby team played the Belmont boys. They definately had a reputation for showing a lot of spirit.;) No lack of community pride then.
When I moved to Langford, near 20 yrs ago I enjoyed the freedom of being outside the city. One could drive from Western Speedway to Sooke at Jacklyn in about 5 minutes, even on a Saturday PM. Try that now. There was enough shopping then, yet wilderness was always minutes away. Big box stores, golf courses, don’t use them or need them.
So…I’m not particularly thankful for the city being brought to me. IMO, the “trickle down” improvements that actually benefit Joe resident Langford have yet to outway what has been taken away. Developers are here because they get away pretty cheap compared to what other communities would demand. Intermittent sidewalks and bikelanes and pretty boulevards (where there’s room left) don’t cut it!
Progress? Maybe, but I’m entitled to my one opinion, as is everyone else. The election is over, it is council’s duty (sworn oath I believe) to serve the interests of ALL residents, not just those abitious few. What will council do to engage the silent majority? Can a council that totally swatted away a rather well subscribed petition by it’s resident change it’s ways? We’ll see.
Pat said
Wow, what a statement from someone who was running for council. You are tired of hearing about low unemployment rates in Langford? Check your facts Ryan, Langford has one of the lowest unemployment rates in Canada. As for the value of jobs, look around and you will see truck drivers, carpenters, draftsmen, realtors, excavator operators, doctors, dentists, teachers who have all expanded and prospered with the growth of Langford.
West Raven said
Regardless of what you can say about this site and it’s moderators and content, I’m glad it’s here because it’s the only site of it’s kind. I think given that Steven and friends probably have jobs, their time is limited to study, dissect and interpret the shenanigans of city council. This is something we can do collaboratively.
I suggest we start filming council meetings and posting them here.
Upload footage to blip.tv (which accepts longer clips than youtube) and it will give you an embed code.
A good example is a http://electionsvictoria.ca, which used blip for the all candidates meetings. (But uses Youtube for shorter clips)
Adding video will make the site more dynamic and increase interest.
Ryan Hinton said
Perhaps I did not clarify things. I totally agree that Langford has one of the lowest unemployment rates in Canada. My point was, so do all of the municipalities in Greater Victoria. The low unemployment in Langford is simply a sign of the times.
We live in one of the most expensive housing markets in the country, the economy was booming, and there is a labour shortage because of all the retiring baby boomers. Of course unemployment is low. It is simply part of the current economic cycle.
The other point I was trying to stress was that although the unemployment rate is low for the residents of Langford, the vast majority (83%) of these jobs are not in Langford. Therefore, it is inaccurate to suggest there is low employment in Langford as a result of the actions of council.
Yes the unemployment rate improved during the current reign of council, but that does not mean it was because of their actions. If we use that logic and credit council with acheiving low employment, then I guess the slowdown in development and the downturn in the real estate market is council’s fault too. Neither are the result of council.
The question is, how prepared was council, and how did they respond to both the economic boom and the downturn?
I never said there were not good jobs in Langford, as a result of the growth. I said, most of the new jobs in Langford are not high paying jobs. Yes people have expanded and prospered, but I am wanting to set the bar even higher, so there are more people prospering in Langford.
R.J. said
Why not borrow money when the interest rates are down and build when there is an economic downturn? It would keep people employed. Sysco foods has the right idea.
Ernest Black said
Sorry to disagree, but if you take credit for what you did not do, then you must take the blame for what you did not do. It will be interesting to see if council will accept the blame for the downturn that is going to hit Langford.
Nah, the spin will be that ‘it would have been worse without us’, regardless of the truth. Bet you Metchosin and the Highlands fair better, because they avoided the ‘out of control’ development.
Addmittedly a few developers and realestate agents may end up crying the blues. Or not, as houses get flipped when people discover that they can no longer afford them, and have to sell at a low price. Heck, 7% is 7%, and the amount is the same if it’s one million dollar home or two $500,000. Just have to work a little harder to move a home in a bad economy.
Wait a minute, if Langford gets to take credit for the major Western Canada boom, then I suppose it’s fair for Len Barrie to blame Langford for losing a half billion dollars on the Bear Mountain flip, if it actually was done.
And, although it is well pointed out that most of the jobs are outside of Langford, so the city can take no credit, even if it tries to, what was left out is that many many of the Langford jobs are transitory. They are related to the constant development, and will be washed away in this downturn, like the sandcastles they are, when the tide comes in.
What I think one of the candidates was trying to say, is that Langford put all its eggs in the development basket, and did not work to build a real infrastructure. The city is still predominantly a bedroom community with a few service jobs, populated by people who cannot afford to live here.
And a couple of new doctors and dentists do not constitute a huge increase in high paying jobs to the community. If Jimmy Pattison were to move to Langford, the statistics for the average income in Langford would skyrocket. I don’t think it would make much difference to my ability to pay bills, or to my life style.
Pat said
Ryan, I understand that you are a relative newcomer to the community and you may not have been too involved in things until this year. The changes in Langford are profoundly different then any other community in the region, within the same time frame of the past 16 years.
To state that the actions of Council were not directly responsible for major job creation is not correct. The one decision that was the most important was sewers, along with every other development approval since, which created thousands of jobs of every level.
The fact that Victoria is one of the most expensive areas in the country is correct, we are much the same as Miami in the U.S., mild climate, limited land and a high demand for product. But if you check you will find Langford has approved the most affordable housing developments in the region, it is easy to verify this with MLS stats.
The world crisis is going to be a test for all of us. I am very curious to know what your ideas are for this problem? You must have given this some thought or had some kind of game plan, had you been elected. I would also put that question out to anyone,
Ann Cochlin said
Carl wrote: “The little elf and Vern Trew have bitten the hands that feed them. A very poor business decision on both their parts. Who here can honestly say they would support someone who does not support them? Or would recommend their friends support them? It is human nature.”
Carl wrote: “Anne and Stephen..Please point out where in the post it talks about City Government.”
The anonymous caller said Little Elf would be punished for not supporting the city council. Your comment sounds the same.