When you screw up as a politician you hope that time and faded memories allow you to get beyond the offending activity (remember Chretien’s ax the GST platform, and his later denial of promising to do so). I bring this up because the Sports Complex issue and the continued misinformation surrounding it has reared up its ugly head in Vernon and Coldstream candidate forums. So please allow me, as someone who actively opposed its location on the Spicer Block, to briefly try to separate fact from fiction and point you to some the “never again to be trusted players” who are still in our midst.
Fiction: There is a shortage of playing fields in Greater Vernon, and a Sports Complex would amend that.
Fact: According to the Greater Vernon Services Parks Master Plan this is not the case: Vernon has a high ratio of fields for sports relative to other B.C. communities. This was an important feature of the intended application to the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC); it was necessary to establish “community need” in order to allow this block of land to be “borrowed” for non-farm use. That is why you often hear that the intention was not actually to remove the land from the ALR. We all know that, once removed from farm use, it would never be returned to its agricultural potential and this land has the highest rating.
While it is true that some sport user groups like football and track are in need of a facility, why has this not been accommodated by a partnership of GVS and the school district or the college? Why are they being held hostage by the dream of a Sports Complex that would not see field construction for 10 to 12 years anyway?
Fiction: We have a growing need and must develop more sports fields.
Fact: Sport field need is tied to youth demographics and, hence, school enrollment. The BCTF predicts that school enrollment numbers in B.C. will not be as high again as they were in 2000 until the year 2030; we will experience a decline until 2015. There are pockets of growth in communities where employment and affordable housing attract young families; this does not include Vernon or Coldstream. Our older demographics point to recreation needs that should include the likes of safe walking/biking trails not more soccer fields.
Fiction: That this development was about sports fields for kids and not Funtastic trying to find a permanent site away from the restrictions of the DND property.
Fact: The only plan ever shown included the conceptual diagrams for a huge facility including 1000 car parking , banquet hall facilities, ball diamonds and offices for staff; the plan and concept was described on Funtastic’s website. Early meetings called by the Ratepayers bore witness to Funtastic’s executives bragging that they “throw the biggest party in B.C.”. The public rejection of the image of a number of weekends of parties in the Coldstream valley throughout every summer, lead GVS to sell the concept as parks, trails and needed sports fields. That is why the final sell before the referendum was billed as “Say Yes to Parks”. How could one be so callous as to deny our children desperately needed playing fields?
Fiction: There was no attempt to end run around the community.
Fact: GVS (Chairman: Gary Corner, Rep: Glen Taylor) actually sent an application to the ALC to ask for “non-farm’ use of the a large portion of the Spicer Block. Coldstream only became informed of this through the vigilance of Jim Garlick who called it to the attention of the community through the organizational assistance of the Ratepayers. The subject only came to light because the ALC informed GVS that it would need community permission to even apply to the Commission. Repeated attempts by a number of community minded citizens to extract information from Coldstream Council at council meetings fell on deaf ears; there was no response from our GVS representatives. Fiscal implications to the community were not forthcoming, and a request to be given some time to counter the sports user petition that influenced Council’s vote was ignored. It was appalling to a number of us that this Council, with its direct pipeline to GVS, was denying information to our community. Was the behavior of Mayor Corner and Councillor Taylor reflective of ignorance, deceit or incompetence?
Fiction: Glen Taylor had a vision that included a concept of 1/3 sports fields, 1/3 parks and trails, and 1/3 community garden.
Fact: The first time I heard this whopper was at the Coldstream School candidate forum the other night. I guess when you are running for Mayor and have this kind of baggage you spin whatever story you need to (let’s see…community garden sounds nice and green). Mr. Taylor’s true vision was closer to the original Funtastic conception and he publicly expressed it at the Coldstream Council meeting/public hearing in 2007. I recall that he reproached Mary Malerby for listening to concerned calls she received from citizens, when his own straw poll of 16 people that day told him the idea was a great one. The vote that night was 4 (Dirk, Garlick, Malerby, Firman ) to 3 (Corner, Taylor,Williams) against sending the application forward to the ALC. We all naively assumed the OCP was now respected and this prime agricultural land would remain protected. However, this was not to be.
By the next Council meeting, Councillor Malerby changed her mind, based, apparently, on a questionable petition submitted by the sport user groups (the word questionable is used because this petition was never honestly presented to the community as a sports tourism proposal). The issue would now go to referendum, with a reference to the use of the property for parks/sport fields, another deceitful description of the real intentions of GVS (no mention of a sports tourism function).
Fiction: If we didn’t build a sports facility on the Spicer Block then it would go to housing development.
Fact: The only way that the ALC would consider use, other than agriculture, on the Spicer Block, is if the owner, Coldstream Ranch, agreed to consolidate some parcels of agricultural land on the ranch that had become subdivided before the enactment of the ALR (in 1972). This exchange was to result in a net gain to agriculture. Direct communication with the owner confirmed that this was never going to happen (Jim Garlick). The YES phone campaign exploited this piece of misinformation to gain support, and continued to do so even after Al McNiven agreed to correct the spread of this lie.
Fiction: The NO campaign was funded and driven by some special interests.
Fact: The NO campaign started with a group of concerned citizens who, for the most part, did not know each other. They came together to provide factual information to the community regarding the proposed Sports Complex development. The Morning Star would only print information that was supportable with documentation, so the flyers and ads were only quoting the OCP, the GVS Masterplan and Funtastic, and the experiences of other similar complexes. Individuals wishing to see some truth brought to light provided funding. The Ratepayers greatly assisted with getting the information into the hands of citizens (phoning, signage). The resulting NO vote was simply a mirror image of the OCP vote on the protection of agricultural land. These people did the job for a community paralyzed by a dysfunctional Council.
Fiction: Mayor Corner, Councillor Malerby and Councillor Taylor clearly understood the wishes of their community and acted accordingly.
Fact: The resounding NO vote should have come as no surprise to anyone who understood the demographics and concerns of the majority of Coldstream residents (expressed in some detail in the Official Community Plan). The referendum was divisive to the community and an unnecessary expense. It did, however, serve as a vote of no confidence for these members of Council beating the drum about a Sports Complex. Councillors Malerby and Taylor are not deserving of our trust again, and Taylor in the Mayor’s chair is one frightening thought.
Fiction: There is a shortage of playing fields in Greater Vernon, and a Sports Complex would amend that.
Fact: According to the Greater Vernon Services Parks Master Plan this is not the case: Vernon has a high ratio of fields for sports relative to other B.C. communities. This was an important feature of the intended application to the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC); it was necessary to establish “community need” in order to allow this block of land to be “borrowed” for non-farm use. That is why you often hear that the intention was not actually to remove the land from the ALR. We all know that, once removed from farm use, it would never be returned to its agricultural potential and this land has the highest rating.
While it is true that some sport user groups like football and track are in need of a facility, why has this not been accommodated by a partnership of GVS and the school district or the college? Why are they being held hostage by the dream of a Sports Complex that would not see field construction for 10 to 12 years anyway?
Fiction: We have a growing need and must develop more sports fields.
Fact: Sport field need is tied to youth demographics and, hence, school enrollment. The BCTF predicts that school enrollment numbers in B.C. will not be as high again as they were in 2000 until the year 2030; we will experience a decline until 2015. There are pockets of growth in communities where employment and affordable housing attract young families; this does not include Vernon or Coldstream. Our older demographics point to recreation needs that should include the likes of safe walking/biking trails not more soccer fields.
Fiction: That this development was about sports fields for kids and not Funtastic trying to find a permanent site away from the restrictions of the DND property.
Fact: The only plan ever shown included the conceptual diagrams for a huge facility including 1000 car parking , banquet hall facilities, ball diamonds and offices for staff; the plan and concept was described on Funtastic’s website. Early meetings called by the Ratepayers bore witness to Funtastic’s executives bragging that they “throw the biggest party in B.C.”. The public rejection of the image of a number of weekends of parties in the Coldstream valley throughout every summer, lead GVS to sell the concept as parks, trails and needed sports fields. That is why the final sell before the referendum was billed as “Say Yes to Parks”. How could one be so callous as to deny our children desperately needed playing fields?
Fiction: There was no attempt to end run around the community.
Fact: GVS (Chairman: Gary Corner, Rep: Glen Taylor) actually sent an application to the ALC to ask for “non-farm’ use of the a large portion of the Spicer Block. Coldstream only became informed of this through the vigilance of Jim Garlick who called it to the attention of the community through the organizational assistance of the Ratepayers. The subject only came to light because the ALC informed GVS that it would need community permission to even apply to the Commission. Repeated attempts by a number of community minded citizens to extract information from Coldstream Council at council meetings fell on deaf ears; there was no response from our GVS representatives. Fiscal implications to the community were not forthcoming, and a request to be given some time to counter the sports user petition that influenced Council’s vote was ignored. It was appalling to a number of us that this Council, with its direct pipeline to GVS, was denying information to our community. Was the behavior of Mayor Corner and Councillor Taylor reflective of ignorance, deceit or incompetence?
Fiction: Glen Taylor had a vision that included a concept of 1/3 sports fields, 1/3 parks and trails, and 1/3 community garden.
Fact: The first time I heard this whopper was at the Coldstream School candidate forum the other night. I guess when you are running for Mayor and have this kind of baggage you spin whatever story you need to (let’s see…community garden sounds nice and green). Mr. Taylor’s true vision was closer to the original Funtastic conception and he publicly expressed it at the Coldstream Council meeting/public hearing in 2007. I recall that he reproached Mary Malerby for listening to concerned calls she received from citizens, when his own straw poll of 16 people that day told him the idea was a great one. The vote that night was 4 (Dirk, Garlick, Malerby, Firman ) to 3 (Corner, Taylor,Williams) against sending the application forward to the ALC. We all naively assumed the OCP was now respected and this prime agricultural land would remain protected. However, this was not to be.
By the next Council meeting, Councillor Malerby changed her mind, based, apparently, on a questionable petition submitted by the sport user groups (the word questionable is used because this petition was never honestly presented to the community as a sports tourism proposal). The issue would now go to referendum, with a reference to the use of the property for parks/sport fields, another deceitful description of the real intentions of GVS (no mention of a sports tourism function).
Fiction: If we didn’t build a sports facility on the Spicer Block then it would go to housing development.
Fact: The only way that the ALC would consider use, other than agriculture, on the Spicer Block, is if the owner, Coldstream Ranch, agreed to consolidate some parcels of agricultural land on the ranch that had become subdivided before the enactment of the ALR (in 1972). This exchange was to result in a net gain to agriculture. Direct communication with the owner confirmed that this was never going to happen (Jim Garlick). The YES phone campaign exploited this piece of misinformation to gain support, and continued to do so even after Al McNiven agreed to correct the spread of this lie.
Fiction: The NO campaign was funded and driven by some special interests.
Fact: The NO campaign started with a group of concerned citizens who, for the most part, did not know each other. They came together to provide factual information to the community regarding the proposed Sports Complex development. The Morning Star would only print information that was supportable with documentation, so the flyers and ads were only quoting the OCP, the GVS Masterplan and Funtastic, and the experiences of other similar complexes. Individuals wishing to see some truth brought to light provided funding. The Ratepayers greatly assisted with getting the information into the hands of citizens (phoning, signage). The resulting NO vote was simply a mirror image of the OCP vote on the protection of agricultural land. These people did the job for a community paralyzed by a dysfunctional Council.
Fiction: Mayor Corner, Councillor Malerby and Councillor Taylor clearly understood the wishes of their community and acted accordingly.
Fact: The resounding NO vote should have come as no surprise to anyone who understood the demographics and concerns of the majority of Coldstream residents (expressed in some detail in the Official Community Plan). The referendum was divisive to the community and an unnecessary expense. It did, however, serve as a vote of no confidence for these members of Council beating the drum about a Sports Complex. Councillors Malerby and Taylor are not deserving of our trust again, and Taylor in the Mayor’s chair is one frightening thought.
***********************************************************************
1 comment:
Excellent information that I would hope the local population could get to see before the community votes for either Jim Garlick or that other fella.
Taylor is one of the ol' boys in the ol' boys club who wants developers to get their hands on the Spicer Block.
Taylor keeps on mentioning that 'he has the time to devote to Council' and that he's 'an inventor'. Wow, sounds impressive, doesn't it? Sounds like a guy who really wants you voters to think that he's a guy who thinks outside the box. He 'invented' a strap to put a golf bag on a motorcycle. Not exactly a Graham Bell or Nikola Tesla mind.
VOTE FOR JIM GARLICK!!
Post a Comment