Behaviour of Kelowna city council members

[unfazed]

Bestside makes very good points. What affects Kelowna also affects the surrounding area and a concerned citizen is entitled to an opinion like anyone.

What's clear is that the city is not managed very well and maybe its not just council that should be changed up come fall.

My vote goes to any candidate who vows to clear out the management at city hall to make way for new blood. A group with a vision who has the ability to execute. Clearly, strong technical leadership is sorely lacking at the upper levels.

[LoneWolf_53]

Concern is fine and I have no issue with it however the point I've been trying to get across is that it seems a bit late to close the barn door after the animals have departed.

We have city staff in place along with rules. Enforce them to your hearts content but don't go second guessing them in mid stride.

I take issue with the apparent about face and nothing more.

[unfazed]

The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that the problems at city hall run deeper than council and include upper and middle management. I say: clean house!

[ferri]

Councillors waiting to decideby Wayne Moore - Story: 39425
May 20, 2008 / 5:00 am

http://www.castanet.net/edition/news-st ... .htm#39425

Just how many Kelowna City Councillors plan to run for re-election in the fall is still up in the air.

With just under six months remaining before the November 15 municipal elections, only four of the nine current councillors have indicated their plans to seek re-election.

Mayor Sharon Shepherd said back in December she would seek a second term in the mayor's chair.

Three councillors have also said they would seek re-election, including veteran Councillor Robert Hobson, who is chair of the Regional District and vice-president of the UBCM, and first-term incumbents Michele Rule and Norm Letnick.

The rest remain uncommitted.

Colin Day, who has served seven terms on council, says he will need to talks things over with his family before making a decision. Day was first elected in 1973, serving two terms.

He has served five consecutive terms since being elected again in 1993.

Andre Blanleil, also a councillor since 1993, says family and personal issue will also be key to his decision.

Blanleil's son Kyle has been recovering from major surgery a year ago to replace a broken bone in his neck.

Barrie Clark, first elected to council in 1999, has indicated his decision will hinge on the health of his wife.

Clark has already announced he will not serve as a representative on the Regional Board if he does decide to run and get re-elected.

Carol Gran, also finishing her first term, has family in Arizona and has indicated she may not seek another term to spend more time south of the border.

Brian Given, first elected in 1999, says personal health issues will determine whether he seeks a fourth term on council.

In October of last year, Given had a cancerous tumor removed from his bowel. It was his second bout with cancer in 12 months.

In October 2006, Given had surgery to remove a cancerous tumour removed from his liver.

Regardless of how many councillors decide to run again, they will most assuredly have a lot of company on the ballot.

A record 32 names were on the ballot for council in 2005, with another five running for mayor.

It would also appear that development will again be the number one issue, as it was back in 2005.

The next council will have a number of important development issues to tackle, including a new Official Community Plan, Downtown Revitalization and a Downtown Plan, as well as the pace of development in other town centres and along Lakeshore.

[kas]

A couple of queries, if I may:

Once the 20 plus storey highrises are chunked onto the lakefront, what are the chances of any less lanky options being built in their shadow?
Will all other downtown development have to crest the 20 storey mark to be sufficiently practical (or salable??)----or are the lake views to be the exclusive purview of the select few who can afford the top ten floors of Milroys wallet??

Why is this specific council---and their back room puppeteers---so desperately hell bent on pushing through ANY developers plan for the downtown?
If we are such a desirable destination, is there any great rush?
Or are legacies being planned here---common sense, consensus and fiduciary responsibility be damned.

When Mayor Sharon was electioneering, one of the loudest commitments she trumpeted was for 'sustainable development'.
She also mentioned 'taking the time to get it right'.
What she DIDN'T mention is that 'the time' would be completely dependent on the whim and whistle of whichever cheque book bought the clock.
Were this happening elsewhere, we'd be smelling a rat---or suspecting 'personal gain', would we not?

At the very least, we should be strenuously campaigning against any such opportunism come election-time.
Meantime, do whatever is necessary to delay, delay, delay---and insist that ALL the citizenry get their say....not just the vociferous (or salaried) few.

Oh---and watch out for them trying to foist this elephant on us via yet another reverse referendum (AKA 'alternative approval process') ...cuz that's what we've seen every time we steadfastly told them anything they didn't want to hear.
Example: This same crew had to wrap a completely ludicrous concrete puddle in a 44 million dollar spoonful of sugar just to make it minimally palatable enough (or sufficiently more mind boggling) to solicit a communal ''Oh--what the hell...'' from their brow-beaten constituents.
We'll be paying for that fiasco for decades to come....even if we can't afford the entrance fees.

[unfazed]

Very eloquently put.

I note also that this beleaguered council is 'passing the buck' on the Greenway lawsuit to the province. Apparently, since it didn't bother instructing its staff to do any due diligence, council is now trying to lay blame on the provincial government for not telling Kelowna what its rights are. See the story below:

http://www.castanet.net/edition/news-story-39579-1-.htm#39579

Any other city this size would have an in-house legal department to help them avoid major lawsuits like this one.

More short-sightedness displayed by the powers that be here. Maybe instead of trying to save money by getting developers to "plan" their downtown, they should invest in some sound legal counsel. They sure could use it.

[Bestside]

Good post kas...

Wow... the city agreed to pay for something they were not responsible for?

This has been dragged out for years... the people being paid would have settled for much less right at the get-go if they had not had their lives put on hold by this nonsense for a number of years.

Barry Clark is the ultimate pass-the-buck guy for mistakes made... and then the follow...

[unfazed]

Its like this: you either (a) pay a lawyer $10,000 for a well-researched professional opinion before expropriating land OR (b) you pay $50,000 for a lawyer to defend you in court after you bungle the 'expropriation' as you didn't know where the property boundaries are.

Kelowna opted for (b), and consistently takes that route. No wonder they have no money left for planning staff to properly plan the downtown core.

Even Vernon has lawyers on staff.

Its like Kelowna has adopted the attitude of every over-privileged second-generation wealth 20-something with an inflated sense of entitlement who lives here. No talent, no skills, daddy bought it a city to run and it is too self-absorbed and self-congratulatory to bother learning how to do anything properly. Kelowna needs to grow up and start taking responsibility for its actions instead of whining to the province (read: mommy and daddy) every time it messes up. When citizens don't 'obey' its rules it throws a hissy fit and somehow ends up defending itself unsuccessfully in court. Then it gets mad at daddy's lawyer (read: the province).

Hey Kelowna: suck it up, buttercup! Its time you learned there are consequences for trampling people's rights.

[TimmyE]

It just gets stranger and stranger with clown council. Now look at this Simpson thing. From what I read, the lawyers are now trying to get technical with trying to break this convenant. Council should tell them to forget it and get on with trying to honor the spirit of the agreement.

The heck with the results of the in-camera vote. Each one of the council should stand up and release their vote and then we will see who the real clowns are!

[BoyWondering]

Its like Kelowna has adopted the attitude of every over-privileged second-generation wealth 20-something with an inflated sense of entitlement who lives here. No talent, no skills, daddy bought it a city to run and it is too self-absorbed and self-congratulatory to bother learning how to do anything properly. Kelowna needs to grow up and start taking responsibility for its actions instead of whining to the province (read: mommy and daddy) every time it messes up. When citizens don't 'obey' its rules it throws a hissy fit and somehow ends up defending itself unsuccessfully in court. Then it gets mad at daddy's lawyer (read: the province).

Eloquently put Unfazed. The powers that be in Kelowna are small-minded, small-town people who cannot realize that they have a modern, growing city to run. Council and City Hall are just not up to the task and a thorough housecleaning is needed come November.

[damngrumpy]

Hold the press in another post I said it was likely that Given would win against Shepherd. After they antics of city council, and stomping out he damaged his image quite a bit.
He is for the four block developement that many people don't want to see. Young people by and large like it and the old folks don't, hmmmmmm more old folks vote and who do you think will win this dispute?
I too think, the considerations should be extended so more people can be informed. I agree something has to be done to improve the area, but I for one would never approve 30 strories that close to the park and I will not vote for any candidate who supports such a plan either.

[TimmyE]

I didn't know that Kelowna only had four blocks. I think everyone would recognize that downtown Kelowna extends from Harvey to Doyle, from the lake to Richter Street. Shouldn't they try to help all of downtown, not those selected few in the four block area. I sure would be ticked off if I was located on one of those other blocks.

And I really don't know why council has decided to let developers go up and up and up. Our city has lost whatever charm it did have. Has anybody noticed the lack of sunshine in our fair city with all those tall buildings casting big shadows? They are trying to make us look like downtown Vancouver or Toronto. We are Kelowna!

[Stephenmay]

One only needs to look back at promises made by our mayor>
Town hall meetings (joke)
Report Card (joke)
Simpson Covenant (joke, joke)

It was however an interesting speech at the time as she started from 2008 and where we would be! Well mayor, it is NOW 2008 and don't see those changes! With the gender card no longer playable, it will be VERY interesting to see how she plans to get elected this time!

[SOMA]

Don't assume the "rest of the population" is against this downtown development.

Right on, in fact the majority support this fantastic opportunity to transform the downtown disaster into one of north America's most beautiful and liveable masterplanned neighbourhoods.

[unfazed]

Don't assume the "rest of the population" is against this downtown development.

Right on, in fact the majority support this fantastic opportunity to transform the downtown disaster into one of north America's most beautiful and liveable masterplanned neighbourhoods.

And exactly how will this development magically transform the downtown into an instantly livable shangri-la? Its just assumed as a given and I don't buy it. Safe, livable neighbourhoods are built over time, incrementally. Not bulldozed over and then built up from the dirt. Kelowna needs to nurture what little life there is downtown now or else it really will have all the charm and character as a vacant lot.