New Nelson councillors reveal city Budget 'eye openers'
Nelson Star, Feb. 7, 2019
While councillors gush how much they've recently learned about the City's budgeting - and how well it all works - something refreshingly new, possibly game-changing for Nelson's property-owners' perception of the budgeting-process is brought-up by Councillor Anderson.
Yet not developed in the write-up or anywhere else since.
$85K Expenditure = 1% Property-Tax Increase
If - according to Councillor Anderson - at City Hall any expenditure of $80K - $90K - as a "rule-of-thumb" - indeed equates a 1% property-tax increase: with this simple measure major expenditures - particularly those not budgeted - could/should be under much more motivated public scrutiny.
This may partially apply even to grants for budgeted/unbudgeted expenditures - seeing their intent still (always!) requires Council's approval.
1. Exercise Equipment - Lakeside Park
While sets essential for an all-around work-out are part of the older yellow equipment - they are not replicated in the newer black bits and pieces.
Of which 4 sets are clearly dangerous for any age-group; with all sets marked 13+: not to be used by children under 13.
Yet hordes of unsupervised very young children are all over this equipment on soccer-Saturdays; fewer and of all ages - still in numbers - during the rest of the week.
But even the most attentive sometime-supervision won't mitigate the spelled-out danger-factor.
The reason given for installing the black equipment is that the yellow presents liability-issues: it therefore must be replaced. Even though none of the yellow sets are inherently dangerous - they have caused no injury over time - are simple to use and in just fine working-order.
Also see post
An Exercise in Liability
11 Nov, 2018
City Hall - seemingly oblivious to real-time liability-issues with the inexpertly slapped-together black set-up - paid about 78K tax-dollars for it: unapproved by Council. Total costs were about $140K - with a cost-overrun of about 13K (also unapproved!) - and include a grant of $65K from the (silent on this!) CBT.
A 1% property-tax increase for someone's ill-conceived vanity-project at City Hall.
With local news-media nowhere in sight. At best - maybe unaware.
2. Cottonwood Market
Over time/in stages - at least 83K tax-dollars are approved for a new Cottonwood Market, including $40K for a band-shell: this approved in 2017, and announced by City Manager Kevin Cormack to be in place by summer 2018.
Having produced neither the band-shell nor the Market's reincarnation, at least $122.600 went somewhere elsewhere - this including 40K from the (silent again!) CBT!
Another 1% property-tax increase!
If (some of) these funds were misapplied to other purposes instead: one must presume those were unbudgeted, unapproved.
None of these Market steps into nowhere questioned in local media.
Both fundings graphically-simply represent City Hall's rule-of-thumb. There are others. These two examples of budgetary shape-shifting were not volunteered to the public.
'An expenditure of $85K equating a property-tax increase of 1%' should become a mantra hummed by the property-owning public, with City Administration held accountable for every tax-dollar (to be) spent!
Strictly kept in check by Council (once they're done gushing!).
Consistently reported by local news-media - in the readers' interest.
(Their purpose - isn't it?)
22 March, 2019:
Over several days now - the yellow exercise-equipment has been torn-down set-by-set. With the demolition finished today - seemingly this equipment (in perfect working-order) will become landfill(?).
The story goes: City Manager Cormack wanted to give it all away - but found no takers!
Accountability!
Image Credits:
simpsonnotaries
kgwn.tv
naimacanada
Colin McClure, CFO
cmcclure@nelson.ca
Kevin Cormack, CAO
kcormack@nelson.ca
John Dooley, Mayor
jdooley@nelson.ca
City Council
nelsoncouncil@nelson.ca
Pam Mierau, Manager - Development Services
pmierau@nelson.ca
Aimee Ambrosone, Director - CBT
aambrosone@cbt.org
"We want to talk about how we can improve what we have..."
Alex Thumm, Planner
Placating some will disgruntle others - no matter what: we only got what we only got!
Shutting down the single possibility of dealing with the parking-issue - a parkade - because of no land/no money: while superficially reasonable shows a lack of vision!
Vision to Context
And therein lies the rub: Nelson doesn't have a vision of itself. Vaguely aware of a need, over the years several times trying to buy one from snake-oil salesmen passing through. Also vaguely aware of this approach to an identity not working.
All the while chugging along without structured context (based on/in a vision):
in identity-crisis mode.
Example: Slicing-up streets for bike-lanes means (again!) redoing Nelson's traffic-flow and parking overall, thereby congesting downtown more.
That bike-lanes mean more people here will use more bikes - instead of cars - is simplistic.
We are not Vancouver!
So - we need to stop either yet another parking-redo - or the feel-good bike-mentality which Council wants to feed with its share of parking-amnesty money, instead of donating that to a charity, as originally suggested.
You can't effectively have both: more parking and bike-lanes.
Do councillors living out-of-town - the majority - regularly commute by bicycle?
The Sustainable Waterfront & Downtown Masterplan - which should provide guidance/context here - actually is only an inventory-list with a few yawning ideas.
The Plan itself - not based in a vision either - was put together by outside consultants who also gave us Hall St. 1&2, promptly showing no affinity for Nelson.
As in: Hall St. 1&2 - or Stores-to-Shores - starts poorly downtown to end poorly at the waterfront's major waste-water outfall, with its very own viewing-area.
A good logo provides positive brand-recognition in a nutshell. Telling of the absence of a vision-thus-context: the logo of Nelson and Kootenay Lake Tourism is not a logo - but an unimaginative, unremarkable, unmemorable jumble!
Most significant: it does not represent Nelson+ favorably to outsiders!
Railtown Parkade
The shabby current one sucks the energy right out of the whole - otherwise spectacular - block: the stately Hume, the Beauty and the Beast Court House, the neat brick/granite box that used to be Emergency Management BC, and some of the very few remaining old trees downtown.
The Nelson and District Arts Council (NDAC) might envision this Blade-Runner silo as a canvas in its 2nd Mural Festival.
But enough already with mud-puddle 'heritage' colors!
Don't think of a new parkade as just another place to put your car for a while - but a visually stunning, multi-function cultural presence: to be experienced with/without a car.
Replacing the Central School gym and Rod & Gun Club as inadequate community meeting-places; used for performances, celebrations and exhibits; parts - including the roof - rented out as the local go-to place for commercial events.
Adaptable for anything!
The Railtown location is ideal for tourists, with its proximity to the Station and within comfortable shopping-distance from Baker St end-to-end.
No BUTs!
Think big, think future! With a strong vision in place: necessary opportunities will present themselves - as will financing!
A vision first - the natural order - then structured context!
A Vision of Nelson
An inspired/inspiring vision of Nelson-as-a-whole will guide mindful planning, within the context of the whole truly being more than the sum of its parts = synergy.
Creating such a vision starts with a survey of how Nelsonites perceive an ideal Nelson. Positivity only! No limits to imagination!
Multi-media contests organized by the NDAC/CDC support the process creatively. With the public as participants and jury.
While this discovery must be allowed to take its course: band-aid (no context!) projects will need to be put on-hold for the time being.
Image Credits:
Bjarke Ingels - BIG
Alex Thumm, Planner
athumm@nelson.ca
Pam Mierau, Manager - Development Services
pmierau@nelson.ca
Natalie Andrijancic, Planner
nandrijancic@nelson.ca
Sydney Black, Director - Arts Council
info@ndac.ca
Joy Barrett, Cultural Development Officer
cutural@nelson.ca
City Council
nelsoncouncil@nelson.ca
John Dooley, Mayor
jdooley@nelson.ca
Bamboo has been a fundamental Chinese commonality for about 7000 years - representing resilience, modesty and loyalty to centuries of philosophers, poets, painters and musicians.
On a more hands-on level - the first books - period - were strung-together slats of bamboo forming a scroll - with characters written vertically by necessity. These scrolls eventually are of paper - another Chinese invention - made from bamboo-pulp.
Bamboo provided shelter - is still seen as scaffolding on construction-sites, even in big, modern cities - furnishings, household utensils, musical instruments, clothing, food and drink.
Today as always - nothing wasted!
All still more pronounced in far-flung villages: using what the environment offers - keeps offering as a quickly-renewing resource and free of charge.
It is said that young bamboo-shoots - a once-a-year delicacy in China - had/have to be taken earth-fresh from bamboo-groves in the countryside to palaces/high-end restaurants - often at some distance - within one day after being dug-up.
Prized, praised and very expensive when that fresh.
While the skyscraper pictured was built in Shenzhen - a tech/financial metropolis - it quickly came to be adopted affectionately, owned - even by young tech/financial urbanites - as the Spring Bamboo.
To Chinese - earth people: a bamboo-shoot forcefully breaking upward through the ground in spring-time.
To supercilious Westerners: a bullet- or penis-shape.
(No surprise there!)
Spring Festival (Chun Jie), also Lunar New Year, Feb 5 - 19.
Not Chinese New Year: this label is a careless Western convenience.
For accuracy and perspective: the West's actually is Solar New Year.
Moon and Sun.
Yin Yang!
Xin Nian Kuai Le!!!
Image Credit:
KPF China - Dezeen
Pam Mierau, Mgr. Development Services
pmierau@nelson.ca
City Council
nelsoncouncil@nelson.ca
John Dooley, Mayor
jdooley@ nelson.ca
Nelson Star
With the Star usually running efficient bread 'n butter pieces: comments on their reporting and what they report-or-not to me often were more entertaining than the articles.
I say were.
Sometimes thoughtful, sometimes not so much - no matter: the public coming alive, responding, engaging!
Even 0 comments making a statement.
Until some years ago I could post/read comments online.
And then I couldn't.
After contacting the Star and people within my circle - the Star feigning incomprehension, and none around me having this problem - I found that Facebook was behind this.
Having taken over the whole commenting-thing, not only for the Star but all other publications of Black Press, the Star's parental whip.
Facebook wiring this in such a way that subscribers would be immediately identified when just clicking on anything Star - while I - as non-subscriber - was just as immediately excluded completely from the commenting-process. As such not under their control!
An attempt to have me sign-up: bring me into the fold - convert!
Which I wouldn't and won't!
Willingly!
With some digging it became clear that a Facebooklet, just by clicking on any item - article, ad, letter, column, commentary, comment - is factored as a certain kind of person with certain tendencies. These markers channelled into an individualization Facebook has been molding and constantly adding to since the Booklet's day one, in the wonderful world of algorithms. Kept in a jar by the door, and sold - as a whole or in extracts - over and over again to any corporate entity seeing commercial, political or whatever potential in this particular Booklet's gestalt.
Frankenblip!
So - while at the time ostensibly Facebook's function within the Black Empire was - and still is today! - solely that of gate-keeper to keep nasty language out of commenting - it actually has been in control of the employee/reader-psyche: potentially prepared to move - and allowing others to move for financial gain groups, crowds, masses - in a particular direction - by manipulating their most personal soft-spots via smartish-phones.
Therefore - the total of Black Press employees/readers - most probably Booklets - represent a business-opportunity of significant mutual benefit for Black Press and Facebook. And from there between Facebook and any number of personal-info merchants.
It would be naive to assume that the only benefit in this to Black Press - with its about 150 publications today! - is occasional raw language in comments/letters caught for them by a very basic Facebook algorithm.
Black Press paying for that!?
The Booklet mechanism - you click/you're identified - applies to City Hall's relationship with Facebook - as well that with any subscribing organization of any size in Nelson and all over the map - literally!
Nelson's sci-fi kinda life - today!
About gate-keeping. It's not known to outsiders how many times Facebook has here interfered in the commenting-process with stopping comments - but the Star has several times deleted whole strands of commenting thoughts - done its own censoring - after initially having posted them, leaving them up for days.
It has also - for no apparent reasons - closed commenting and disallowed comments - period - on particular write-ups.
So it can be argued who is doing what in this comment-thingie.
Anyway - after much emailing with the Star's bewildered publisher and contacting the Black Press president: comments reappeared but as reading-only for this uncontrollable non-believer. Whether I had a part in that is doubtful.
Big-time for me: the (comment-)funnies were back in the online Star.
BUT!
Deep breath - several weeks ago comments again disappear for me - until now staying disappeared: the Star's publisher again doesn't experience such problem, side-stepping that he is a Booklet, so why would he; promptly developing a case of reading-incomprehension; and claiming that no corporate decision has been made to drop comments for non-subscribers.
Right!
So - here I am: somewhere between disingenuous in-house denial, the Black Press head-office, and - scary! - the possibility of Facebook going this on its own.
A pity, because lately commenting had become much more incisive and polished - often relevatory!
And I do miss City Councillors letting themselves get pulled into commenting > commenting on commenting > commenting on commenting on commenting themselves frantically into a corner - stuck!
Nobody understands me!
Of late many Booklets have developed a clear distaste for Zuckerberg and his documented disregard for user-privacy - expressing this by unsubscribing: so - is this latest comment-act really the way to go, Zuck/Mr. Black!?
The Star jerking readers around like this is unacceptable - from a so-called community-newspaper yet - and at best insensitive of its suits in Vancouver.
Such poor P.R. may become reflected in advertising-dollars.
The Nelson Daily
Curiously - The Daily - also having an arrangement for commenting with Facebook - has consistently let non-believers in on readers' comments - not writing but reading them.
The recent ode to itself - submitted by the Cottonwood Lake Preservation Society on its GoFundMe campaign - generated 0 comments.
Makes you think - as comments can!
Image Credits:
google+
Marsel van Oosten
David Black, President
dblack@blackpress.ca
Eric Lawson, Publisher
eric.lawson@blackpress.ca
Todd Coyne, Editor
editor@nelsonstar.com
City Council
nelsoncouncil@nelson.ca
John Dooley, Mayor
jdooley@nelson.ca
Directly following post
"Stump(ed)
21 Dec, 2018
below
"Notice of Motion
Councillor Logtenberg is bringing forth a Notice of Motion:
THAT Council resolves to endorse the Cottonwood Preservation Society as an important community initiative to preserve the forested land above Cottonwood:
AND FURTHER THAT Council agrees to write a letter of support stating this to
e (sic) used in the society's grant applications."
Agenda
Reg. Council Meeting, 7 Jan, 2019/7:00pm
While all other items on the Agenda have miles of material substantiating their merit: Logtenberg's Notice of Motion has - nothing!
Which raises 3 questions:
How did he get on the Agenda with nothing?
How did he get on the Agenda - period - seeing that a basic Nelsonite never would have got there - with(out) that and like this!
Conflict of interests?
What with no substantiating material to allow Council to prepare for this Notice and its possible merits - before the meeting: all they can do is pick apart the item as stated in full on the Agenda above.
What's with this Society?
The idea of a group of self-declared ents was first presented, 19 Dec, 2018, to/by
"a handful of scientists and community groups" (Star).
With Xmas and New Year's celebration-distractions between then and the Council Meeting, 7 Jan, 2019, this Society has had less than 2 weeks to (be) form(ed), build-up a significant member-base, get a practicable identity with a solid manifesto.
All in all hardly a strong history to inspire possible grant-providers.
So they need City Hall big-time for an endorsement and letter of support!
a.
The manifesto is what?
b.
On the Agenda the group is referred to as the "Cottonwood Preservation Society" but also "an important community initiative".
Society and initiative are not the same.
c.
What is the structure of this group? Like - name(s)/position(s) of who's in charge; name of treasurer?
d.
What position does City-Councillor Logtenberg hold in this group?
Will he attend the Meeting as presenter, councillor or both?
e.
Is this group officially registered - if so as what?
f.
How many card-carrying members does it have?
g.
What is the group's fundraising-profile? As in - how much for what exactly? How will fundraising/spending be supervised - transparently adhering to legal norms - by whom?
h.
"An important community initiative to preserve the forested land above Cottonwood" is vague in intent and area.
Initially the MO was to buy a specific piece of property: has this changed?
If so - to what?
i.
If funds indeed are to be raised for the purchase of the Cottonwood Lake property: have the current owner's plans changed from logging it, beginning in March?
If not: what's the point?
With none of this information made available: how can Council possibly endorse this whatever-it-may-want-to-be of tree-fanatics?
Council - at this point - writing a "letter of support" for grant-applications, could make future applications difficult for the City. Particularly with one of its Councillors - an essential player in all this - surely voting Yes on both requests.
Or would he recuse himself?
Council members need to ask themselves questions like those above prior to the Meeting - and repeat them during, demanding clear answers: before endorsing anything and signing letters of (unsupportable) support.
This is about business: hug a fact!
Image Credit:
tumblr
City Council
nelsoncouncil@nelson.ca
John Dooley, Mayor
jdooley@nelson.ca
Kevin Cormack, CAO
kcormack@nelson.ca
A hot spring-day. I walk along the trail - green-on-green, except for deep logging-truck-gashes up the hill, next to the trail, just past the trestle-bridge (nobody talks about that!) - looking forward to the skunk-cabbage farther on, and long-green hair streaming around my legs in the cool creek.
There is talk that smoking skunk-cabbage root - while supposedly poisonous or possibly because of it - would get one high. I never try, neither does anyone I know. I do love the bitter smell from cupped-hands blossoms, the lacquered leaves!
Then across the highway to Cottonwood Lake. I can't deny: at its best with nobody else there. The still water a bit scary - stump-monsters below! - therefore - just in case - I stay close enough to the float. Stretching out on its warmth to doze after.
Never thinking about whose land this is - quite naturally mine while I am here - but vaguely aware that some unidentified part is privately owned.
Same trees, same water.
It has been public(ly available) info since Feb. 2018 that logging around all this is to happen - most likely sooner than later. While the automatic reflex may be wanting an immediate study on the (possible) environmental impact - nothing!
The EcoSociety?
In the meantime - in an attempt to leave my skunk-cabbage, my creek, my lake, my float as they are: there may! have been negotiations - initiated by the RDCK - when and how and reaching how far we are not told - for buying this area from the owner, who bought it specifically to log for the highest possible profit. Which he has a right to!
What we do know: neither Nelson nor Salmo - necessary participants in any such deal - are ready to participate financially. Regardless - the RDCK, Council and the City's CAO won't talk about more because of the "sensitivity" of the negotiations. What negotiations at this point after what we also are not told.
MLA Mungall has not responded to invites on the matter.
Go figure!
And while for nearly a year no public momentum has developed - not for the lack of news-reports: on Dec. 19 a sudden
"Emergency meeting energizes supporters of Cottonwood Lake recreation area" Nelson Daily, Dec. 20
and
"Meeting hears appeal for community group to buy Cottonwood Lake land" Nelson Star, Dec. 20
All this rather the faster they go - the behinder they get:
1.
Serious logging in/of the area supposedly will start around Mar. 2019. So what seems an "emergency" now didn't have to be if the public - or specifically interested individuals - had focused on this sooner.
The RDCK? Who knows.
2.
This meeting's organizer does not necessarily come from altruistic motives only: he lives nearby!
3.
There is no workable "community group" as yet. Just putting one together - acceptably structured - will take considerable time, energy and focus. Getting swept along in a righteous, feel-good meeting is one thing - longer-term commitment to minutiae quite another.
Sooo... Councillor Logtenberg claiming that such group would be "faster on its feet" with negotiations than the RDCK is not only a bit too chest-thumping but also possibly eyebrow-raising in these here Smallishtown politics.
4.
The RDCK and several Council members are present at the meeting: but they still won't divulge specifics on the(ir) non-deal, even though clearly a non-starter.
Curiouser and curiouser - supposedly negotiations between the RDCK/City Hall and the property-owner are still ongoing - why else the secrecy: yet this private bunch - comprising whomever and (some) councillors, run by whom? - is ready to create a parallel? reality of also wanting to buy the property?
Presenting but not representing. Neither fish nor fowl.
Or what!
5.
Would the owner even talk to such an impromptu group at this stage of his game?
6.
Yet Councillor Logtenberg also enthusiastically proposes "crowdfunding (such as a GoFundMe campaign) and at the same time apply(ing) for grants from all levels of government, the Columbia Basin Trust, other funding bodies, and private donors." (Star)
Dream on! Having little experience in such undertakings - even just City matters: he seems naive, seeing that there's absolutely nothing in place to support any funding-applications - while logging is to commence in earnest in a couple of months. Meaning - the very experienced owner is set on go!
With a solid business plan!
7.
While councillors know how much funding might be needed: if they don't talk about it to their (possible) group - why should anyone even consider contributing financially, with basic info deliberately withheld?
For overall transparent doability: launching another - funded somehow - plan now would first necessitate cancellation of the one originated by the RDCK/City Hall.
And they communicating accumulated info to the group as a whole.
Everybody's role clearly defined in whatever-this-is - don't hold your breath.
8.
Ultimately - collectively buying a piece of land in the neighborhood will have no impact on logging in the suburbs. It is an expensive, self-indulgent gesture.
This must be about province-wide legislation.
9.
What is it with these people?
While the large number of attendees at this "emergency meeting" attests to (a sudden) interest in the matter: how many have actually spent time regularly around the lake - if any - hiking-in quietly, instead of driving-in-and-out conveniently.
If more were hiking along the trail: the logging between bridge and highway could have received (more) attention/concern long ago.
Be honest now: what's more important - Cottonwood Lake or Xmas shopping?
As much as I want the area to remain untouched-by-human-hands, just to have it there there when I am ready to go infrequently - to paraphrase Councillor Logtenberg, when he sees no problem with accumulated parking-fines of 16 years flushed down the toilet:
"Sometimes you just have to suck it up and move on."
Nothing remains the same - even in Nelson.
Image Credits:
Bill Metcalfe
spoonflower.com
thecolorsofwater.com
amcaluminum.com
City Council
nelsoncouncil@nelson.ca
Ramona Faust, RDCK
rfaust@rdck.bc.ca
John Dooley, Mayor
jdooley@nelson.ca
Parking-Amnesty Approval
Council approves - without in-depth discovery of Staff's supporting material and meaningful discussion - the City's "parking-ticket amnesty" in the Regular Council Meeting, 3 Dec, 2018.
While councillors energetically participate in the discovery and development of an earlier environmental issue: they now are far less expressive. Standing-out though is dramatically self-promoting Councillor Logtenberg, here with a grand gesture of us sometimes just having to suck it up and move on.
Telling us what to do is not part of your job-description, Councillor! We won't suck it up, and many of us will probably find it difficult to move on past the long history of the whole damn thing - with its entrenched lack of professionalism: transparency and accountability!
More on this amnesty-as-such prior to approval can be found in the post below:
Parking-Ticket Amnesia
27 Nov, 2018
Now What?
How many of the out-standing 27.000 tickets - of which a vague half now (belatedly) appear to be non-retrievable outside the area - will be paid at $15 per - between
4 Dec, 2018 and 19 Jan, 2019 - we will know by the end of next month. Or not.
It will take longer to determine whether paying-up will have an impact on parking-attitudes, nurtured during 16 years of inconsistently paid fines and no result-focused supervision of process by those in charge at City Hall.
Amnesty-participation by many could be an indication of local drivers not only willing to mend their wicked parking-ways but also to atone for this behavior of old.
Acknowledging it as unbecoming of gluten-free tree-huggers.
Facebook subscribers paying (being warned to pay) amnesty-fines to the City online - for multiple tickets yet: may find at some point in the future that their credit-rating has been compromised. Seeing that Facebook gleans subscribers' data when emailing to/emailed from City Hall - also a subscriber - harvesting/selling them in bits. The same will apply to email traffic between possibly less subtle collection-agencies (more on them below) and hold-outs.
Off to the workhouse!
Paying in person may be the safer way to go.
Conversely - the fewer takers the amnesty attracts - the clearer the indication that tossing tickets will continue to be the way to go.
City Hall's negligent P.R. job with getting the many-layered significance of their old system>amnesty>new system to the public in tardy bits and pieces - only incidentally divulged over weeks by the CFO to local news-media - may keep I-do-because-I-can attitudes fixed.
Referring those not participating in the amnesty to a collection-agency - as now proposed by the City - seems like a colossally labor-intensive, colossally expensive job.
Is City Hall hiring?
Having such agency chase down someone for 50 bucks is bizarre. Costs of it would be much higher than the sum gone after.
So - who gains? After who pays for it?
Linking payment of fines to issuing new plates by the ICBC has not worked so far because it was really attempted by one municipality only - thus shrugged-off.
So - for the province-wide apathetic now it's: been tried, can't be done!
While actually this needs City Hall to seriously organize itself around the issue with a clearly developed vision, to be shared with all MLAs in a concerted effort, and all UBCM members united!
Looking for thoughtful practicable input from those who elected/hired you: the kind of issue you are paid very well to take-on!
Free Veterans'-Parking
What precedes the amnesty-approval in the same Council Meeting (its timing showing still more insensitivity to the public's current mood about parking-shenanigans in the street and at City Hall) is a request - 30 Oct, 2018 - for making parking free for those with a veteran's licence-plate.
"Dear Mr. Mayor Dooley
& Members of Nelson City Council
Re: Veteran's Parking
I was in Kamloops recently, and I was surprised and delighted to learn that, as a veteran, with veterans licence plates, I am entitled to park on any meter in the city or on any city parking lot, and that I am not required to pay.
Parking is free for veterans.
I understand that the gesture does not reduce revenues significantly because there are so few veterans. The merchants approve of the arrangement because it encourages veterans and their families to spend more time shopping. In Kamloops veterans are recognized as being special, having served in defence of their country. It is a generous and tangible way to say "thank you".
I would like to request that Nelson City Council give consideration to extending free parking to veterans with veterans licence plates, in recognition of their service.
Yours truly
Ieuan J. Gilmore"
This promptly initiates at City Hall the
"PROPOSAL: Provision of free parking to veterans
PROPOSED BY: Public"
"Council received a request from Ieuan Gilmore of Nelson requesting that Council consider providing free parking to vehicles that have veterans licence plates."
"People are eligible to apply for a veteran licence plate in British Columbia if they were honorably discharged from or are currently serving (author's emphasis)..."
1.
The request does not come from the "Public" but a single member of it.
2.
"Veteran licence plate" is a misnomer. Even current reservists fall under the vet-label here.
3.
No Canadian Armed Forces members - past/current - have ever "served in defence of their country". Considering Canada has never been attacked militarily.
4.
Yet his all-superseding come-on is "The merchants approve of the arrangement because it encourages veterans and their families to spend more time shopping."
While absurd reasoning - good P.R. for Chamber of Commerce reps at City Hall: wanting us all to shop local! For Xmas! No wonder this request was rushed through Council within a month!
Who approve this also unanimously and without discussion. Such as: will these "veterans" be allowed to park anywhere, for any length of time?
Presumably so - as restrictions are not part of the City PROPOSAL's approval.
Consequences
Meter-maids say "they see approximately 10 vehicles per day with veteran's plates". Conceivably having 10 more cars hog metered parking-stalls must have significant impact on right-now/right-here availability.
Seniors who are also vets will get vet-plates, thereby park anywhere forever. Giving-up their costly seniors' passes - and btw there goes that income for the City as well!
With Greyhound gone there will be more cars, ergo more parking needed. At this point allowing free-range parking - to an only vaguely defined group - is folly!
How long will tourists - the predominant force behind Nelson's economic health - put-up with ever decreasing parking?
For instance - the City gave-up almost 100 Nelson Commons parking-spaces, this requested in a Variance. Originally required by bylaw for a project of its size. This Variance had been worked on (for the Co-op) by the City long before even submitted to Council (by the Co-op).
Predictably, these spaces now missing have had a spiraling affect on the near neighborhood and from there into all of downtown.
City Hall looking after its own.
Smallishtown Politics!
With parking-attitudes as have been, no more parking to be squeezed into the streets, and old-parkade spaces rented to permanents: Council needs to stop giving away parking-stuff reactively and start to proactively think of creating parking: a new state-of-the-art, architecturally stunning, multi-function parkade (in Railtown) now!
Nothing else will do (it)!
Image Credits:
John Nordell
livabl
dezeen
flickriver.com
City Council
nelsoncouncil@nelson.ca
Pam Mierau, Mgr. - Development Services
pmierau@nelson.ca
John Dooley, Mayor
jdooley@nelson.ca
Kevin Cormack, CAO
kcormack@nelson.ca
