Simpson convenant upheld by courts

[unfazed]

Kudos to the mayor for being brave enough to lend at least some transparency to an issue that clearly rouses passions.

As it stands, the electorate is not able to make a fully informed vote until council members disclose how they vote.

This is a great opportunity to push for LESS in-camera meetings and MORE individual accountability. Is that too much to ask?

[unfazed]

One could speculate on all sorts of reasons why the city would choose to appeal, including having contracted to "make its best efforts" to have the covenant removed. It may be a very expensive promise.

[cdanielson]

I can't believe we are spending taxpayers money on this. Let it go... move on... and spend our money on more important issues - like homelessness and social issues. - Cindy Danielson

[Devil's Advocate]

Politics I hate these things, what are they supposed to be "cute"?

[unfazed]

Hitting the nail on the head

To the editor:
RE: Simpson land wasn't free

The letter from S.K. hit the nail on the head. Stan Simpson didn't donate a square inch of land to Kelowna. He sold it to them for a very reasonable sum. He only added the covenant at the time to prevent the City from allowing another commercial enterprise from starting up on the property. This was to protect his own interests. Namely by blocking any possibility of another sawmill opening so close to his.

The Mayor and Council have every right to get rid of this covenant. People, get your facts before condemning Council. Downtown Kelowna needs more development to make it more inviting and livable. Right now it is the domain of bums and druggies.

K.G. - Westside

Who came up with the idea that building high rises downtown will somehow magically make the 'bums and druggies' disappear? Spouting off nonsense as if it were facts does nobody any good.

Same goes for the "reasonable sum" the city paid for waterfront property. Mr. Simpson used that money to clean up the land before transferring ownership. Get your facts straight indeed.

The problem I have is that the city and some less informed members of the electorate think its perfectly acceptable to attack a solemn promise made for the benefit of all citizens on a legal technicality. Why? Even if only for the symbolism it represents, the covenant should be left alone. The city says it will keep the land as park anyways. The above letter writer appears to think its going to be developed. So which is it? The city is free to zone the land how it wants AND keep the covenant in place. So why bother with the court system?

Who wants to live in a town where the ethical bar is set so low that a technical loophole is an invitation to breach a contract. Gee, nice place to do business, not knowing if the person you are shaking hands with has his fingers crossed behind his back.

[2by4angel]

I hope they do make this an election issue - I certainly won't be voting for anyone who goes along with current plans to appeal this decision!

I could think of a number of areas where I'd rather have my tax money go - Family parks/programs/services, homelessness, and so on and so forth.

I don't have a problem with development - Just a problem with those who see fit to disregard the opinions of the people they are supposed to serve and who are more than happy to push aside the 'little people' in order to get what they and their friends want...

[dirtrider]

I hope they do make this an election issue - I certainly won't be voting for anyone who goes along with current plans to appeal this decision!

I could think of a number of areas where I'd rather have my tax money go - Family parks/programs/services, homelessness, and so on and so forth.

I don't have a problem with development - Just a problem with those who see fit to disregard the opinions of the people they are supposed to serve and who are more than happy to push aside the 'little people' in order to get what they and their friends want...

Par for the course....they look to Campbell and cronies for their inspiration......talk about disregard for the "little people" and they have no problems breaking contract laws that have been in place for decades......i think I'll just leave it at that before I go.......

[normaM]

hmm, even made it into the first section of Thurs Globe and Mail.

[Symbonite]

Hey sounds like a heated topic here.

FYI there is an election comming soon....if you guys dont like what is happening at city hall then throw in your hat in the ring and do something about it.

be nice to see some new blood in the chairs. I would but I cant...I dont live in Kelowna.

[Nebula]

Councillor Brian Given had the following statement sent to all media a short time ago:

The events leading up to a decision made by council and public comments by the mayor have resulted in a community and a council divided. I have spoken to other members of council and I issue this public statement with the intention that it will be cause for reflection by all the people involved giving us an opportunity to move forward.

We have many challenges facing us Transportation, Water use, Sustainability, Affordability, Downtown Redevelopment and Crime. The business of the city should never become polarized by one issue.

Solving these problems will require Council, Staff and our citizens to be focused and free of dissention.
Politics can be and often is about conflict but politics can and should be about resolution that is my [our] wish for the betterment of the community.

Councillor Brian Given

[Glacier]

In other words, "If you agree with me your standing up for unity and co-operation, but if you disagree your playing politics."

[Born_again]

...and our citizens to be focused and free of dissention.

Well I'm not sure if I understand what dissention is, but I didn't notice too many signs of dissension on the citizens behalf recently.


Late edit: I was thinking of the same sort of thing, recedingglacier. However, I was comparing the statement to the one GW Bush made about either your with us, or you're a terrorist...or summink.

[NAB]

So.... what is Brian Given's community involvment history, occupation, and/or business outside of his Council/Regional District duties? That's something I like to know about any incumbent or candidate in/for public office. The City website doesn't seem to offer such detail, yet it is very common for MLA's and MP's.

Nab

[unfazed]

Bafflegab designed to obscure the fact that he totally voted to appeal the court ruling. He thinks the transportation issues of Kelowna will be solved by removing the covenant?

If Given is mayor you can bet that tax money will be pouring into appealing the Simpson Covenant ruling.

[onestop67]

I just saw a pig fly by my front window.

http://www.castanet.net/edition/news-st ... .htm#42748