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.

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,

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

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.

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.

Better to say nothing and be thought a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt.

Often the best person for the job isn’t the one who applies, but the one whom their peers recognize as skilled.