How to Vote (according to the Upper Kits Residents’ Association)

799

The Upper Kits Residents Association has spoken and were kind enough to distribute their 2008 Vancouver Election Residents Update (PDF) newsletter to members earlier this week. Unfortunately, I live in ‘Lower Kits’ but a reader passed this on to Kitsilano.ca. If you’re wondering who to vote for it’s worth a read.

Anyone who is happy with how the last term of Council has been managed by the NPA majority would likely experience more of the same by voting NPA. Anyone who wants a change in the direction of Council should consider what COPE and Vision Vancouver are proposing. Change will only happen if there is a strong statement from the citizens that change in direction is what we want.

Results and anlysis from candidate questionnaires on issues important to our neighbourhood is reprinted after the jump:

David Cadman and Ellen Woodsworth, the COPE Team – They filled in one questionnaire for both candidates, and they clearly said yes to almost all of the questions. They commit to:

  • neighbourhood based planning processes should be implemented through CityPlan as the primary basis for future planning,
  • objective and meaningful public consultation,
  • an extension of the EcoDensity public process to address the outstanding concerns raised,
  • reinstating third party appeals,
  • civic party financing, disclosure, donation and campaign reform.

Gregor Robertson and the Vision Vancouver Team – They filled out one questionnaire for all the Vision Vancouver candidates. Vision said yes to almost all of our questions and commit to the same as COPE above:

  • neighbourhood based planning processes should be implemented through CityPlan as the primary basis for future planning,
  • objective and meaningful public consultation,
  • an extension of the EcoDensity public process to address the outstanding concerns raised,
    reinstating third party appeals,
  • civic party financing, disclosure, donation and campaign reform.

There are a few questions where Vision is not as clear as COPE. Vision has indicated they are checking with their candidates on these points.

Peter Ladner and the NPA Team – All the NPA candidates were sent the questionnaire individually, twice each directly. The NPA Campaign Manager was also sent the questionnaire requesting a NPA party response. We were told by the Campaign Manager that the NPA is non-partisan and does not have a party position, but they would send it on to the individual candidates.

This is in contrast to the fact that the NPA party has made statements to the media on a party platform and has voted as a block on almost every issue at Council during their term. We have not received questionnaires back from any of the NPA candidates that are now on Council, only from three of the new NPA candidates, so those returns are attached. The NPA candidates presently on Council can therefore only be evaluated by their track record at Council over the last term while they have had a majority.

All the NPA Councillors have mostly voted as a block with Sam Sullivan, including candidates Peter Ladner, Suzanne Anton, Kim Capri, and Elizabeth Ball. This includes creating, promoting and approving the EcoDensity Charter and Initial Actions.

The NPA have given every indication by their actions on the existing Council that:

  • they intend to fully implement the EcoDensity initiative as it is presently approved, if they have a majority on Council,
  • prefer a top down planning process of EcoDensity rather than neighbourhood-based CityPlan process,
  • do not listen to the citizens,
  • do not support reinstating third party appeals,
  • have voted down civic party financing, disclosure, donation and campaign reform.

Last modified: November 13, 2008

7 Responses to " How to Vote (according to the Upper Kits Residents’ Association) "

  1. Hmmm. Live in upper kits and haven’t seen this gem. Good thing you published it. Thanks for saving a tree. :>)

  2. Len says:

    Since we all live in Kits, I’m going to assume that most of you all use the Burrard Bridget regularly. Although COPE and VISION parties seem to be more friendly towards many issues, they are planning on closing one lane of the bridge for cyclists.

    This will not only effect those who commute, but will also add smog to our neighbourhood by clogging up traffic all day long on the bridge.

    This Saturday, say no to VISION and COPE and VOTE for the NPA slate of candidates.

    Any other vote is a vote for the special interests and causing unnecessary traffic gridlock in our city.

  3. fear mongering says:

    Len is pushing the usual NPA spin. The Vision/COPE proposal allows for a full three lanes during rush hour, meaning there won’t be a traffic jam.

    During rush hour periods, there is a 30% difference in traffic between rush and non-rush directions.

    Besides, Peter’s plan will cost more than $33 million. completely unnecessary.

  4. Steve says:

    In all seriousness, the proposal to close a lane on the Burrard Street Bridge…for bikes…is completely and totally moronic.

    I take the 22 everyday across the bridge, and the difference between rush and non-rush hours is NOT 30%.

    The bridge can be scary to walk across though, the only idea that makes sense would be to put up a guardrail along the sidewalks to there is some separation between pedestrians and the fast flowing traffic.

    An entire lane for bikes? Get serious.

  5. Shawn says:

    @fear mongering – you’re an idiot. During rush hour the Burrard Street bridge is gridlock. Closing a lane will be disasterous.

    Doesn’t anybody remember the trial they did a couple years ago. It was a joke. Enough said.

    Ladner for Mayor – he’ll represent the Westside!

    Juice-boy is a clown.