If not now, then when?

The following is from the Straight:

by Stuart Mackinnon on Apr 22, 2013 at 11:59 am

People ask me why they should vote Green. I answer because we need change. Real change. And if we don’t vote for change now, then when?

Voting for the Green party means voting for change. Radical change for some. It means not buying into the tired old ways of the mainstream parties. It means saying no to the cynical old methods of buying your votes every four years. It means taking a leap of faith that things can be better, politics can be honourable, and change can happen.

Voting Green means voting for positive change. It means voting for a clean, bright future. It means caring what kind of world our children will inherit, and their children after them.

I joined the Green party because I wanted to be part of the change that needs to happen. As a secondary teacher I want the best future possible for my students. I want a world that is safe, clean, and sustainable. I want a world where innovation and inspiration are what the economy requires. I want a world where clean air, clean water, and healthy food are the right of every citizen.

I’m running in Vancouver-Fraserview because I live, work, shop, and play in Fraserview and want to represent my community in the legislature. I live in the East Fraserlands neighbourhood. I teach at Killarney secondary. I shop on Fraser Street, Victoria Drive, at the Killarney Market, and other local businesses. I walk along the Fraser River and at Everett Crowley Park. I want to be sure that the issues that matter most to my neighbours are articulated. I want a healthy neighbourhood. I want a neighbourhood with diversity. I want a neighbourhood for everyone. Fraserview is a dynamic multicultural neighbourhood where you know your neighbours and where people care about each other. I like that.

I want to help my neighbourhood. I want to ensure seniors have a safe and caring place to meet. I want to make sure there is a Seniors Centre built—not just promises but action. I want to make sure there are local health-care options. Seniors shouldn’t have to travel across the city to access care.

I want to help improve public transit to a neighbourhood that is car-dependant because there aren’t buses that take you where you need to go. I want to ensure that residents can stay in their neighbourhood to shop. I want to support local businesses that give back to the community.

I want to make sure there is affordable housing in my community. I want to encourage a diversity of living models which include single family, townhomes, condominiums, and rental housing. I want the great cooperative housing movement brought back.

I want the best education possible for the children in my community. I want educators to feel respected, schools to be fully funded, children to be safe, and curriculum to reflect the challenges of the present as well as the dreams of the future.

Green politics are about more than land, water, and air. Green politics are about healthy communities, healthy families, and a healthy environment.

Join with me in making real change in British Columbia. Make your vote a vote for a healthy community. If you don’t vote for change now, then when will you?

Vote for positive change. On May 14, vote Green. In Vancouver-Fraserview, vote for Stuart Mackinnon.

Stuart Mackinnon is the B.C. Green candidate for Vancouver-Fraserview.

Stuart Mackinnon running for Greens in Fraserview

By Sandra Thomas, Staff writer Vancouver Courier, April 16, 2013

Former park board commissioner Stuart Mackinnon has been named the Green Party candidate for Vancouver-Fraserview to run in the May 14 provincial election.

I wasn’t surprised by the news because even though Mackinnon had officially left politics, I heard from him regularly about community issues, particularly those affecting the Fraserview/Killarney area. Mackinnon was unsuccessfully in a bid to get re-elected to the park board in the 2011 municipal election.

Mackinnon will go up against former city councillor Suzanne Anton, who is taking another kick at the can after losing her bid to become the B.C. Liberal candidate for Vancouver-Quilchena.

Mackinnon lost no time in criticizing the party’s choice of candidate for the riding. “I have to admit I was surprised the premier would approve someone from Kerrisdale to run in Vancouver-Fraserview.”
Kash Heed, the Liberal incumbent for the riding, is not running for re-election. The Liberals have won the riding in the last three municipal elections by narrow margins. The NDP candidate for the riding is Gabriel Yiu.

Mackinnon, a teacher at Killarney secondary, said he decided to run at the prompting of neighbours who told him they are unhappy with what they perceive as neglect from the city and park board.

Mackinnon told me if elected, his goals include pushing for a long-awaited seniors centre, an item of concern in several past municipal elections. As a resident of the community, Mackinnon says he knows first-hand just how badly underserved the community is when it comes to transit and that’s something he intends to work on. Mackinnon notes housing prices are also pushing residents out of the community so he wants more co-op developments built. The Champlain Heights neighbourhood of Fraserview is the city’s poster child for how to make co-op housing work and Mackinnon says he wants to expand on that success.

$$ for seniors centre
Speaking of that elusive seniors centre, April 15, the day before the provincial election officially launched, the B.C. Liberals issued a press release committing $1.3 million towards a new facility. Killarney resident Lorna Gibbs, who has been leading the charge for a seniors centre, told me she’s pleased the news came in the day before the writ was dropped. What it means for the future, she adds, is yet to be determined.

sthomas@vancourier.com
twitter.com/sthomas10

© Copyright (c) Vancouver Courier

Why I Do What I Do

For those of you who don't know it, I am a secondary special education teacher. I have a program for grade 8 and 9 students with severe learning disabilities. I teach them their academic subjects and hopefully prepare them for reintegration to the regular stream for grade 10.

Working with the kinds of kids I do, success is measured in inches not miles. Sometimes the improvement is hard to see. This is part of a note I received from a parent after I e-mailed that their child had done exceptionally well on a test. The student is one of those who I thought would probably not graduate when she started. Now she is honour roll. She has climbed mountains in the year and half that she has been in the programme.

"Hello Mr. Mackinnon

We are very proud of her achievements too. She has come a long way. Just to share with you, after the quiz, she was a little nervous that she did not do well.  Yesterday, when I asked her, she put on a sad face and pretended that she failed. She’s getting good at it too, we may need to enrol her in drama class!

On behalf of my husband, we want to say thank you very much for your encouragement and assistance throughout the  2 years. You have also given her confidence and opened her up.  She started as a shy little girl sitting way at the back hiding behind the books."

I really don’t take credit for the success. I am only the pathfinder. She has not only climbed mountains, she has moved mountains. She deserves all the credit for putting in the time and effort.

Most of the students I get feel worthless in the beginning. Their educational experience has not been a positive one. My goal is to give them first the confidence to be successful and then the tools to learn. From there I really think they learn in spite of me.

This is the most rewarding job I've ever done. I know I learn as much, or more, from them as I will ever give back. The biggest lesson I have learned is that no child is disposable. Every child is worthy of our best efforts. Every child deserves an education. Every child must be given the opportunity to achieve to their utmost potential.

Stuart Mackinnon is the Green Party of BC candidate for Vancouver Fraserview

For Immediate Release

12 April 2013 Vancouver - The Green Party of BC is pleased to announce that Stuart Mackinnon will represent the party in Vancouver Fraserview in the May 14, 2013 provincial election. 

Stuart is a former Vancouver Park Board Commissioner who represented the Green Party from 2008 to 2011. He focused on parks and public space issues and fought against fee raises for children and the closing of the Bloedel Conservatory.

“Fraserview deserves better” comments Stuart Mackinnon. “I want to give the people of Fraserview a choice in this election. I want to fight for a better tomorrow for Fraserview and all the people of British Columbia by offering them a clean, bright future based on sustainability and green ideals.”

Stuart lives in the Fraserlands neighbourhood and teaches at Killarney Secondary school. He is also a Governor of the VanDusen Botanical Garden Association and a board member of Axis Threatre.

“The Green Party represents a change from the old style politics and brings a sense of hope for a brighter, more honest political system” continued Mackinnon. “Fraserview needs an MLA who lives, works, and plays in this neighbourhood, not someone who just represents it. Fraserview deserves better. British Columbia deserves better.”

Stuart joins a team of passionate people who want to represent the citizens of their constituency in the BC Legislative Assembly,” comments Jane Sterk, leader of the Green Party of BC. “These are new times. Our candidates have new ideas.”

“A vote for Stuart Mackinnon is a vote for real change,” concludes Sterk.

-          30 –

Media contact: Stuart Mackinnon: 778-389-1956 or stuart.mackinnon@greenparty.bc.ca

Aren't Pipelines Supposed to be Safe?

With all the Enbridge advertisements flooding our airwaves I think it's time to show another kind of flood. This is footage of the oil spill in Mayflower Arkansas. This is not what I want for British Columbia.

This is what Reuters had to say:

Exxon cleans up Arkansas oil spill; Keystone plan assailed

 

By Kristen Hays and Matthew Robinson

Sun Mar 31, 2013 7:26pm EDT
 

(Reuters) - Exxon Mobil on Sunday continued cleanup of a pipeline spill that spewed thousands of barrels of heavy Canadian crude in Arkansas as opponents of oil sands development latched on to the incident to attack plans to build the Keystone XL line.

Exxon spokesman Alan Jeffers said on Sunday that crews had yet to excavate the area around the pipeline breach, a needed step before the company can estimate how long repairs will take and when the line might restart.

"I can't speculate on when it will happen," Jeffers said. "Excavation is necessary as part of an investigation to determine the cause of the incident."

Exxon's Pegasus pipeline, which can carry more than 90,000 barrels per day (bpd) of crude from Patoka, Illinois to Nederland, Texas, was shut after the leak was discovered late Friday afternoon in a subdivision near the town of Mayflower. The leak forced the evacuation of 22 homes.

Exxon also had no specific estimate of how much crude oil had spilled, but the company said 12,000 barrels of oil and water had been recovered - up from 4,500 barrels on Saturday. The company did not say how much of the total was oil and how much was water.

Allen Dodson, Faulkner County judge who is the top executive for the county where the spill occurred, told Reuters in an interview on Sunday that the smell of crude was less potent on Sunday as cleanup efforts continued, saying it was weaker than the smell of fresh asphalt laid on a road.
"The freestanding oil on the street has been removed. It's still damp with oil, it's tacky, like it is before we do an asphalt overlay," he said.

Exxon said it staged the response to handle 10,000 barrels of oil "to ensure adequate resources are in place."

Officials from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Transportation's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) also were on site to investigate the spill.

Fifteen vacuum trucks remained on the scene for cleanup, and 33 storage tanks were deployed to temporarily store the oil.

The pipeline was carrying Canadian Wabasca Heavy crude at the time of the leak. An oil spill of more than 1,000 barrels into a Wisconsin field from an Enbridge Inc pipeline last summer kept that line shuttered for around 11 days.

The 848-mile pipeline used to transport crude oil from Texas to Illinois. In 2006 Exxon reversed it to move crude from Illinois to Texas in response to growing Canadian oil production and the ability of U.S. Gulf Coast refineries to process heavy crude.

The Arkansas spill drew fast reaction from opponents of the 800,000 bpd Keystone XL pipeline, which also would carry heavy crude from Canada's tar sands to the Gulf Coast refining hub.
Environmentalists have expressed concerns about the impact of developing the oil sands and say the crude is more corrosive to pipelines than conventional oil. On Wednesday, a train carrying Canadian crude derailed in Minnesota, spilling 15,000 gallons of oil.

"Whether it's the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, or ... (the) mess in Arkansas, Americans are realizing that transporting large amounts of this corrosive and polluting fuel is a bad deal for American taxpayers and for our environment," said Representative Ed Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat.

Supporters of Keystone XL and oil sands development say the vast Canadian reserves can help drive down fuel costs in the United States. A report from the Canadian Energy Pipeline Association, put together by oil and gas consultancy Penspen, argued diluted bitumen is no more corrosive than other heavy crude.

A year ago Exxon won a court appeal to charge market rates on the Pegasus line, or rates that are not capped and that can change along with market conditions without prior approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

That decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington D.C. said the Pegasus pipeline is now the "primary avenue" to move Canadian crude oil to the Gulf Coast. The ruling also said Exxon moves about 66,000 barrels per day on the line.

Last week PHMSA proposed that Exxon pay a $1.7 million fine over pipeline safety violations stemming from a July 2011 oil spill from its Silvertip pipeline in the Yellowstone River. The line, which carries 40,000 barrels per day in Montana, leaked about 1,500 barrels of crude after heavy flooding in the area.

Exxon has 30 days from the March 25 order to contest those violations.
According to PHMSA, the U.S. has 2.3 million miles of pipelines.

CLEANUP
Exxon said that by 3 a.m. Saturday there was no additional oil spilling from the pipeline and that trucks had been brought in to assist with the cleanup. Images from local media showed crude oil snaking along a suburban street and spewed across lawns.

Twenty-two homes in the affected subdivision remained evacuated on Sunday, though Mayflower police were providing escorts for residents to temporarily return to retrieve personal items.
Jeffers said a couple of homes "appear to have small amounts of oil on their foundations," but he had no information on damage estimates or claims. Exxon had established a claims hotline for affected residents and said about 50 claims had been made so far.

Dodson said oil that made it to the street went into storm drains that eventually lead to a cove connected to nearby Lake Conway, known as a fishing lake stocked with bass, catfish, bream and crappie.

He said local responders that included firemen, city employees, county road crews, police quickly built dikes of dirt and rock to block culverts along that path that stopped crude from fouling the lake.
"We were just in the nick of time," he said.

Exxon later deployed 3,600 feet of boom near the lake as a precaution.
Dodson said crude also got into several homeowners' yards, which will take longer to clean up.
"We've just gotten used to having pipelines go through cities and counties, and you hope something like this doesn't happen. My heart goes out to all of the people personally impacted," Dodson said.

(Additional reporting by Timothy Gardner in Washington; Editing by Steve Orlofsky, Bernard Orr, and Chris Reese)

Old Vision Vancouver hands raging over park board mess

By Allen Garr, Columnist Vancourier.com February 14, 2013

 

Just so you know: a battle has been raging for the past couple of weeks in the back rooms of Vancouver’s governing party. A number of old Vision Vancouver hands are livid over the damage being caused to the party’s reputation particularly among its own supporters by the park board’s assault on community centres and the blow back in the community.

There is no clear winner yet on that one although there has been movement.

This week, Vision board member Maria Dobrinskaya, appearing in her regular city hall panel slot on CBC Radio’s The Early Edition, conceded that the shenanigans of the past few months have been destructive to whatever good will existed between community centre volunteer boards and the Vision-dominated park board.

This week, too, a senior Vision insider at city hall made this observation: the attempt by the park board to control revenues raised by those volunteer boards and manage programs at their centres was never part of Vision’s election platform. This was: Over the next three years, the Vision Vancouver park board will “focus on making programs affordable for everyone by introducing a pilot program of specific free-of-charge family days at recreation facilities and ensuring that the universal Flexipass and Leisure Access Cards are honoured at all Park Board facilities.”

Most, if not all, of the community centre boards are already willing to negotiate these conditions; it wasn’t necessary to threaten to wipe them off the face of the earth. But that’s what happened when Vision threw the first punch. Here is how Trout Lake Community Centre board president Kate Perkins saw it unfold. She is one of the most onside with the park board’s desire to renegotiate the 40-year-old joint operating agreement (JOA).
 
But first a bit of background. Rewriting the JOA has been on the agenda of the past few park boards. Vision operatives have been dealing with the matter for the past five years, increasingly annoyed at the surpluses building up in the coffers of some community centres while others went wanting
.
But the matter never got tackled. Until now.

Which brings us to this process and the first punch. Park board general manager Malcolm Bromley arranged to meet with the presidents of the community centres last February to see, as Perkins says, “if we could land on something” that would work.

But that cordial atmosphere abruptly ended when Bromley disappeared only to return with an ultimatum. “This is the deal” Perkins recalls him saying, and adding, “We hope you’ll be part of it. If not, we’ll find someone else” and replace your board. It was non-negotiable.

The “deal” meant the community centre boards would lose control over programming and revenues.
You can imagine how that went down. But the park board seemed unmoved by the building anger. And as Perkins says, when you “start getting (the more moderate) Dunbar, False Creek and Trout Lake boards angry, you’ve done something terribly wrong.”

In January, community centre boards asked for a facilitator. Bromley responded with a demand the negotiations be settled in three weeks. Perkins and the rest rejected that as unreasonable.

Then followed the ridiculous nine-hour park board meeting at the West End Community Centre that ran until 3:30 in the morning. It only served to inflame the public against the park board even more. In spite of that, the position of Bromley and the rest continued to shift as more community centres agreed to come to the table with the offer of a mediator or facilitator to help move things along.

Where we are at right now is a bit of a pause for most community boards while a mediator or facilitator is being sought and approved. The issue of controlling revenues and programming is still the most contentious. Meanwhile, the most determined community boards are boycotting the process and using some of their surplus funds to launch a campaign and build public support against the park board.

As for Vision Vancouver, the internal dispute continues. Even the most adamant Vision soldier will say they are doing the right thing, knowing full well the process has been deplorable and the whole exercise is costing them politically.

agarr@vancourier.com
twitter.com/allengarr

© Copyright (c) Vancouver Courier

 

 

 

‘Have-not’ community has idea to solve Vancouver park board saga

February 13, 2013 

By Emily Jackson Metro Vancouver

Sure, it’s down at the bottom on Vancouver park board’s “have-not” list, and yes, it’s all for a little more equality between community centres.

But the Marpole-Oakridge Community Centre, the centre in Vancouver’s poorest neighbourhood according to a city ranking, still isn’t a big fan of the park board’s proposal to collect all the revenue and redistribute it to level the playing field.

Instead, Marpole’s community association president Danny Yu is looking for a way forward with an idea for an alternative financial model – a middle ground that’s been largely absent from the saga between the board and the city’s 23 centres as they negotiate a new operating agreement.

Yu suggests a taxing model where the board and associations come up with a formula where a percentage of revenue would go to the board based on size, programs or usage.

The current model, where the associations don’t give up any revenue to the park board despite getting the buildings rent free, isn’t working perfectly, Yu said.

“If you have a store in a shopping mall, you pay rent,” he offered as a comparison to his proposal. “That leaves a little bit for volunteers to continue to provide good programming, and the park board gets their money.”

A similar idea was rejected about two years ago at an Association Presidents Group (APG) meeting, he said, but it will likely be more palatable since the board’s proposal to control all the revenue. Former park board commissioner Stuart Mackinnon proposed a similar idea in a recent blog post.

Both APG chair Kate Perkins of Trout Lake and park board commissioner Niki Sharma did not want to discuss potential funding models as the matter will be negotiated at the bargaining table.

“All ideas will be welcomed at the table. We will take a look to see what works to meet the goals of better equity and access,” Sharma said in an email.

 Copyright 2001-2013, Free Daily News Group Inc.

What is the ultimate purpose of life?

"What is the ultimate purpose of life? It is to give. Start giving. See the joy of giving."
Narayanan Krishnan

Is it time to phase out Vision's Penny?

By Allen Garr, Columnist Vancouver Courier February 7, 2013

 

 

There is at least one penny a growing number of people in Vancouver would be happy to see taken out of circulation. That would be Penny Ballem, Vancouver's city manager.

Vancouver Vision operatives insist it's nothing but NPA political blarney to believe that the whole mismanaged assault by the Vancouver park board on the city's community centre volunteer boards of directors is being driven by Ballem.

Her Vision Vancouver political masters may eventually pay the price for this appalling behaviour. But community centre board members from across the city note it was Ballem who kept turning up like the proverbial bad penny when she joined her direct report, park board general manager Malcolm Bromley, in a series of meetings a few months back. Community centre presidents and their boards were told the park board would, in a new Joint Operating Agreement, be taking control of all community centre revenues. And that was "non-negotiable."

More recently, on Tuesday evening while Green Party Coun. Adriane Carr was sitting in a public hearing at city hall regarding a contentious West End development, her cell phone rang. It was Ballem. Carr would get back to her at the next beak.

It turns out that on Monday, Carr, following city council procedure, filed a notice of motion to ask staff essentially this: given the park board's intention to take over the revenues of community centres which would most likely dampen future fundraising efforts by community center volunteer boards, what was the city's estimation of the funding shortfall this would create for the park board? And, given that the park board is a department of the city from whence it receives its budget, what contingency plan does the city have to make up for that funding shortfall?

A reasonable request based on a reasonable assumption, no?

But it's also reasonable to assume we will never find out. Because according to Carr what Ballem phoned to say was this: Carr's notice of motion would never see the light of day. Carr says she was told that her motion asking for information could jeopardize the "negotiations" now going on between the park board and the community centres.

When I emailed Ballem and asked about her extraordinary move to muzzle an elected representative, her communications machinery spit out an elaborate "no comment."

Incidentally, the public hearing Carr was sitting through Tuesday night under city hall rules ended at 11 p.m.. It would continue at a later date to hear the rest of the 50 or so speakers. (The rule says hearings must end at 10 p.m. but can, with a unanimous vote of council, be extended by one hour.)
Nothing so civilized was contemplated across town the night before. That's when 74 people lined up to speak in a packed room at the West End Community Centre. This was at an "emergency meeting" called for by what is an increasingly inept and disrespectful park board to hear from the public on the board's plan to have their way with community centre funds. For decades, these funds had been left in the hands of volunteer boards to be used for everything from renovations to the creation of new facilities. That was ending.

The approximately 30 pages of material for the meeting was not available until 11 that morning, which meant that most board members who work for a living didn't see it until an hour or so before the meeting started.

As you may already know, the meeting started at 6:30 p.m. and clattered on for nine hours, which made it 3:30 in the morning with members of the dwindling audience repeatedly asking for an adjournment only to be rebuffed.

It finally reached a sorry state of frustration because of the lateness of the hour and the vast majority of the speakers opposing what the park board was up to, frequently pointing out significant errors in the material being presented. I was long gone by the time the Vision majority blithely passed the motions to support what they had intended to do all along and cops had to be called in to restrain those who were left.

This passes for what Vision Vancouver calls citizen engagement.

agarr@vancourier.com

© Copyright (c) Vancouver Courier

 

 

 

Vision pokes hornet's nest at community centres

By Allen Garr, Vancouver Courier February 1, 2013

 

 It is hard to imagine just how much political trouble Vision Vancouver is in right now. The pushback over its attempt to put its hands into the pockets of the city's community centres makes past protests over spot zoning or the imposition of homeless shelters relatively insignificant annoyances.

 

Let me explain why by first telling you a story. In 1934, 22 neighbours around East Hastings near the PNE each put 50 cents in the pot to come up with $11 dollars. That was the amount they needed to register a society for the purpose of protecting their park from the encroaching exhibition.

 

The neighbours then went to the park board of the day and asked for money to help develop public tennis courts and a lawn bowling facility.

The park board said: We don't have any money but you go right ahead and raise the funds on your own. Which they did. That small group of volunteers would grow to become the Hastings Community Association, which was frequently required to be self-reliant in meeting neighbourhood needs.

That story is not unlike any number of inspirational stories generations of volunteers, who have served on the boards of Vancouver's community centres, have woven into their cultural history.
To my knowledge, none of the Vision Vancouver park commissioners - who form a majority on the board and are central to the attack community centres now feel they are under - has ever served on a community centre board.

What is worse, they fail to grasp just how disrespectful, how insensitive, how politically threatening their actions are. They most certainly must be unaware of the damage they are causing themselves as they spill the political capital that Vision has accumulated while in power.

What is most appalling is the strategy being employed to roll out Vision's new policy. We are told it will bring "equity" to all centres, rich or poor, East Side or West Side, and the people who chose to access the facilities. None of the centres, by the way, has a problem with that. It is about who controls the money that has community centre boards more than twitchy.

When was the last time you saw a government introduce a new policy where an elected official hasn't been front and centre to either cut the ribbon or take the heat?

Yet what do we see here? On Tuesday night at the Kerrisdale Community Centre meeting, while a couple of Vision Park commissioners pasted themselves against the wall and refused to speak (except to the media) and city communications bureaucrats scurried about, it was park board manager Malcolm Bromley who took to the stage to be booed by the packed room and two other spaces that were quickly set up to handle the overflow crowd of about 400.

In fact, for virtually all of the past briefing meetings with community centre boards, park commissioners have been told not to attend. It has been Bromley and, usually, city manager Penny Ballem. When the NPA's Melissa De Genova tuned up at one briefing the board invited her to, Bromley turned on his heel and walked out.

This is one reason why Hastings Community Association president Eric Harms is just one of many who say this whole attempt to get control of the community centre funds is a conspiracy being driven by the city manager: "When Malcolm Bromley speaks you can see Penny Ballem's lips moving."

Of course it would be naïve to think Ballem would do anything of this magnitude without support from the mayor's office. But the tone at the top around that joint always has our mayor heavily insulated against criticism.

With six full-time city staff apparently attached to this strategy, is it any wonder that a few of the community centres have decided, for better or worse, on funding a public relations campaign of their own?

This is particularly understandable when the park board's idea of communications has included installing locked glass bulletin boards in community centres where they alone control the content of the messages and they hold the keys. How smart is that? How smart is any of this?

agarr@vancourier.com

© Copyright (c) Vancouver Courier

 

 

 

City must quit making enemies of volunteers

By Stuart Mackinnon, The Province February 1, 2013

 

The rhetoric is heating up. Tempers are flaring. There seems to be a showdown shaping up. How did things go so terribly wrong? The battle over control of programming at Vancouver community centres has begun in earnest.

For most community-centre associations, CCAs, the last joint-operating agreements were negotiated 30 years ago. Ever since, the parks board and the centres have been talking about improvements and changes, and ever since there has been mistrust.

When I became a parks board commissioner in 2008, staff told us that this would have to be dealt with during that term. I'm not sure if it was because most commissioners did not understand the issue or because they were afraid of upsetting the community, but not a lot was accomplished. I understood that the status quo was not tenable. I felt that if local associations were not willing to change, that more central management might be necessary.

Since then I have learned a lot. I have learned more about how the CCAs operate. I have learned what they do and why they do it. I have also learned I was not always told all the information I needed to make a good decision. Too many meetings were held behind closed doors and commissioners were told by management not to get involved when involvement was needed.

The CCAs' experience with the board's senior management has not been healthy. Entrenched positions have become the rule.

Enter city manager Penny Ballem, who insisted that all assets belonged to the city and if the CCAs would not voluntarily give them up, they would be dismissed and the assets would be taken. Hardly a good way to instil trust and goodwill.

I believe that community centres are collective assets and belong to everyone. I believe in universal access; that one membership should give you service in all centres. What I don't believe in is a one-size, one-price system. Some facilities have more services than others or offer different levels of service. Some offer services that others do not. Clearly the community knows best what should be offered.

I also believe in shared financial responsibility. Larger centres can rent more and therefore collect more. Destination centres can attract more people. Some centres will be able to make more money than others - but they will also have greater demands on their services and so higher costs.

I think an idea for sharing resources is to have CCAs pay for their use of the facilities and for the utilities they use. Smaller centres pay less, larger ones pay more. The funds from this pool could then offset disparities in programming across the city. Another idea would be to take a percentage of all revenues after expenses generated by CCAs to be put into a fund that would be shared equitably across the system for programming. This has been done successfully in school districts that have a diversity of income neighbourhoods. The key here is to be creative and stop making ultimatums.

The CCAs are loath to hand over revenue they generate as they don't trust the parks board's management. There is no guarantee any moneys taken by the board wouldn't be put into general revenues to cover shortfalls in other areas or used as an excuse for the city to cut further the parks board's budget.

A one-size fits all system will never work in Vancouver because not all community centres are funded the same way. Some receive financing directly from other levels of government. That funding would be put in jeopardy if all moneys were taken by the board.

A system where there were no CCAs would not be able to access provincial and federal grants. A system where local associations could not keep money from rentals and programming would result in fewer facilities and less services.

The CCAs now understand the need for universal access and have agreed to this. They also understand that not all neighbourhoods are the same and are willing to talk about this. Clearly, there has been movement on their side.

The board needs to take a step back and stop trying to make the CCAs into enemies instead of the partners they are. The CCAs have to look at finding ways of making the system work better and fairer. Both sides need to negotiate in good faith and in a clear and transparent manner.

These are not simple matters, but entrenched positions will not help. Let's think outside the box. Let's look at ways of making a system that has been successful for over 50 years even better. Let's work together for a better Vancouver.

Stuart Mackinnon was a Green Party parks board commissioner from 2008 to 2011. He blogs about parks and public-space issues at Betterparks.org.

© Copyright (c) The Province

 

 

Community centres protest Vancouver park board plan

Public meeting at Killarney turns ugly after commissioner's rant

 By Sandra Thomas, Staff writer Vancouver Courier January 30, 2013

 

 Photograph by: Dan Toulgoet, Vancouver Courier

Approximately 400 concerned citizens turned out for the Kerrisdale Community Centre Association's meeting Jan 29.

Almost 400 seniors showed up to a hastily called meeting at the Kerrisdale Community Centre Tuesday afternoon to protest what many are calling a cash grab by the park board.

As first reported in the Courier in 2011, the park board is negotiating with the city's community centre associations to finalize a new joint operating agreement. The Vision Vancouver dominated board wants to change the way the centres operate, including centralizing "core programs." The most contentious of the recommendations would see the park board take all revenues from room rentals and programs - money traditionally retained by the associations. The park board argues the money should be pooled into a general account to be distributed amongst "poorer" centres. The park board calls the recommendation "non-negotiable."

That's where at least six community centre associations have drawn a line in the sand. The model for the joint partnership, developed almost 50 years ago, sees the park board supply the physical building while the associations manage the centres. In some cases, the associations helped build the centres, rinks or pools.

The afternoon meeting at Kerrisdale was held for seniors while a second meeting Tuesday evening at the centre was open to the public.

Senior Marianne Kropf told the Courier she's been a regular at the centre since her husband died three years ago. She warned the park board must pay attention to the senior vote.

"If you want to get something done get a bunch of seniors involved," said Kropf. "There's power in this."

Robert Lockhart, vice-president of the Kerrisdale Community Centre Association, said the two main concerns with the proposed agreement are a fear the costs for programs will increase dramatically and that the seniors lunch program would be eliminated.

Another evening meeting was held at Killarney Community Centre, where the gathering turned ugly when Vision Vancouver commissioner Trevor Loke addressed the crowd in what can best be described as a tirade. Loke began by thanking the crowd for showing up, but those platitudes quickly turned into a rant about the inequalities between poor associations and their rich counterparts in communities like Killarney.

Loke's comments caused the crowd, made up largely of blue-collar workers, seniors, immigrants and young families, to react with shouts and boos of disapproval.

Following Loke's comments, a man stood up and asked the young commissioner why he thought it was reasonable to "scream at us like kids."

"Who the hell do you think you are," the man yelled at Loke.

Former Green park board commissioner Stuart Mackinnon also addressed the crowd at Killarney Tuesday night.

"Tonight we are discussing in my opinion, the most cynical, desperate and dishonest power grab by a city management who are more concerned with their own megalomania and control than what is best for the people," Mackinnon said.

Green Coun. Adriane Carr told crowds at both Kerrisdale and Killarney that despite information to the contrary, the issue is in fact a council matter and does not lie solely with the park board. Carr explained if there is a financial trickle-down effect to changes in the way park board programs are run, any demand for more money will come back to city council.

sthomas@vancourier.com
twitter.com/sthomas10

© Copyright (c) Vancouver Courier

New city policy puts Vancouver community centre programs at risk

Opinion: Majority on park board wants to radically alter what has been an enduring partnership. By Eric Harms, Special to The Vancouver Sun January 29, 2013

 Let’s call her Marietta. When she arrived in our community, Hastings-Sunrise, as a recent immigrant from her native Trinidad, she brought along her aging mother, her two-year-old twins, and a burgeoning addiction to prescription painkillers. If that weren’t enough, the twins were both suffering from and undiagnosed developmental condition that rendered them non-verbal and physically aggressive.

When Marietta’s mother turned up, twins in tow, at the Hastings Community Centre’s Family Enrichment Centre one day, she was, understandably, near the end of her tether. What she found there was truly a place of refuge, where staff took the time to welcome her and her young charges. On subsequent visits, staff acquainted Grandmother with available social service assistance, including assessment of the twins’ condition and a recommendation to attend the Hastings preschool, renowned for its work with special-needs children. As well, and in their own time, they checked in with Marietta, helping and encouraging her in her struggle to put her life back on track.

Of course, this account (with identifying features changed), while true, is an extreme case. Even so, every month scores of young families make use of the Family Drop-In and the parent-and-tot gym, making important social connections in an environment that encourages parent/caregiver participation, creative play, socialization, Healthy-Child Development, with health professional visits, parenting education, language development, and nutrition programs. All of this, at $2 per family per visit.

One might very well ask how it is possible for an organization or agency to provide such a valuable program for so little; how could it possibly pay for itself?

The fact is, it doesn’t. This year, our family drop-in will end up around $35,000 in the red; up from about $27,000, due to a significant cut in the social service grant that helps support it.

Happily, the Family Enrichment Centre — as are all the programs at our community centre — is operated by the Hastings Community Association, a registered charity which has for decades run the community centre in partnership with the park board.

I say happily because our association board, recognizing the incalculable social value to single parents, immigrants and young families represented by such a program, is able to underwrite this loss to our bottom line. We can do this because we have a history of quickly acting on a recognized opportunity, sound business acumen, and prudent investment. Plus — let’s be honest — a little bit of luck. These are the ingredients for an annual surplus.

We at Hastings are not unique; all of Vancouver’s community centres have associations that provide programming and ongoing capital improvements to facilities, overseen by volunteer boards. The vast majority of those sitting on these boards actually live in the community they serve. They are your neighbours who, until now, have made manifest the idea of local control over local resources and interests. And they do it for free.

I say ‘until now’, because the present majority on the park board want to radically alter what has been an enduring partnership — in our case at Hastings, one approaching 80 years. Under the proposed new regime, all program and rental revenues (other than a very small, as-yet determined stipend) would accrue to the park board. In most cases, including ours, we would end up with a tiny fraction of the monetary resource we currently have. This cash-grab would have the obvious effect of stripping every volunteer board of the ability to make informed decisions and respond to local needs. We would be reduced to writers of grants. And then, we would be obliged to spend the grant money on programming in which we had little or no say.

Ostensibly, the reasoning for taking all the revenue is to address inequities — taking from the ‘haves’ to give to the ‘have-nots’. But, in giving his briefing on the proposed changes to Killarney’s board and user groups, the general manager of parks and recreation said, ‘It’s all about power. And the money is the power’.

Senior park board staff would have us believe that implementation of the new ‘agreement’ will be seamless; that no patron will notice any difference. But, when pressed, the park board’s recreation director allowed that continued use of our funds in our community centres could only be guaranteed for two years. In other words, until the end of the present election cycle. Subsequent civic administrations might divert some (or all) of the funds to pet projects. Worse, a bean-counter at some far remove might see the red ink generated by our Family Enrichment Centre, and be unable to see the inestimable value of that place to the lives of our neighbours.

The mayor’s chain and mace have changed hands 20 times since our association was founded in 1934. Countless civil servants have come and gone since we signed our joint operating agreement with the park board. Regardless of which way the political winds have blown, the boards of Vancouver’s community centre associations have been intrepid in assessing and responding to the needs of our local communities. It would be a shame to squander such a resource.

The Mariettas of our city deserve better, too.

Eric Harms is president of the Hastings Community Association.

© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun
 http://www.vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/city+policy+puts+Vancouver+community+centre+programs+risk/7888569/story.html

The Community Strikes Back!

Tonight I witnessed a remarkable event. About 350 citizens from their neighbourhood filled the gymnasium at the Killarney Community Centre to voice their opposition to the Park Board take over of their facility. I understand an even larger crowd filled Kerrisdale Community Centre to speak out for their neighbourhood--the second such meeting they hosted today. Speaker after speaker spoke of their passion for their community and community centre; how they had spent countless hours using the facilities and volunteering for the association. Some seniors spoke of how they had work to built the community centre.

With only the exception of Vision Park Commissioner Trevor Loke, the speakers were unanimous in their condemnation of the Park Board/City proposal and process.

Commissioner Loke started out well and spoke passionately about his vision for a city wide equitable community centre policy, but unfortunately he had not read his briefing notes and didn't understand that the Community Centre Associations had already accepted equity and universality. He then harangued the audience about monetary and fiscal fairness. Unfortunately he undid whatever goodwill he had built up by attending the meeting.

Ainslie Kwan, President of the Killarney CCA spoke eloquently  to introduce the issues. She was followed by sports and senior association representatives. I was then asked to speak before opening the floor to questions and comments.

I have included here my remarks to the meeting:

My name is Stuart Mackinnon. I both work and live in this community, being a teacher at Killarney Secondary and a resident of the East Fraserlands neighbourhood. I’m also formerly a Park Board Commissioner, having served from 2008 to 2011.

I didn’t want to come here tonight. I can think of an awful lot of other things I would rather be doing. But then I remembered that quote from Edmund Burke that says “The Only Thing Necessary for the Triumph of Evil is that Good Men Do Nothing”. Now you might think that is a bit over the top…that we are only talking about community centres and that in the grand scheme of things this is pretty minor---but you would be wrong. What we are talking about are the fundamentals of democracy. The way participatory democracy is supposed to work is that the people have a say in the issues that affect them.

I have always maintained that community centres work precisely because they are run by the community. It is the local folks who know what’s best for their neighbourhood. Every day people are becoming more and more dis-empowered; disenfranchised; disillusioned. And it is precisely the kind of power grab that we are talking about tonight that makes people turn away; lose faith and ultimately resign themselves to disengage from the process.

Tonight we are discussing, in my opinion, the most cynical, desperate, and dishonest power grab by a city management who are more concerned with their own megalomania and control than with what is best for the people. I was part of the early discussions about this renewing of the Joint Operating Agreements, and while most of those discussions were in-camera and so I am not permitted to talk about them, I can tell everyone here tonight that this is not what was discussed. We talked about equity and fairness. We did not talk about control or a cash grab—which is, whether they want to admit it or not, what is at the heart of this matter.

I am told that the Community Centre Associations have agreed in principal through a negotiated JOA to accept the use of leisure access, universal memberships and the flexi pass cards in all centres. This meets all of the requirements of equity and fairness. So why are we still here? Could it be that the heart of this matter is a cash grab by not only the Park Board but the City Manager’s office? Is this a way of cutting Park Board funding even further? Is taking away the monies generated within a community, that at the moment are re-invested in the community, to put into general revenues so that the cuts to the Park Board budget are less noticeable? Through the careful use of revenues generated within this community, the Killarney association contributed $450,000 towards the new pool and $350,000 towards the ice rink used during the 2012 Olympic Games. Where would this money have come from without this community centre association’s fiduciary responsibility to the neighbourhood and the Vancouver community as a whole?

No, there is more to this issue than meets the eye. This goes beyond local management. This whole process has been flawed from the start. Too many discussions have been behind closed door, in-camera, or otherwise out of the public view. I look around here tonight and I see only one Commissioner in attendance—why? Because Senior Management have told the Commissioners they are not to attend—when did management start directing the elected members? I thought it was the other way around?

My experience tells me that both the elected officials and the community centre representatives have been misled and that these negotiations have not been in good faith. That the City through its senior management has had no intention of finding an agreeable solution, but instead have been trying to marginalize and alienate the communities so that the City can walk in and take over. This is not good management. This is not democracy. This is not what we pay our taxes for.

The people of Vancouver deserve better from its managers, better from its government. Community Centres in Vancouver have been successful because of, not in spite of, the community involvement and the local management of resources. The equity and fairness that I and others as Commissioners demanded have now been agreed to. What more do they want?

The Girl Effect

VERY IMPORTANT! Please watch. And DO something about it. 

Girls + Education = REAL CHANGE.

Killarney Community Centre Association pitches 'call to action'

By Sandra Thomas, Staff writer  January 24, 2013

 

Provoked by conditions included in the park board’s proposed joint operating agreement, the Killarney Community Centre Association has called an emergency meeting for next Tuesday evening.

Keith Jacobs, past president and current treasurer for the association, said the park board’s general manager Malcolm Bromley and city manager Penny Ballem have given the associations an ultimatum, which he described as unacceptable. The park board wants to take control of the revenues generated from programs and room rentals, which traditionally have remained with the centres. “I’ve heard Malcolm Bromley say at several meetings whoever has the money has the power,” said Jacobs. “They say it’s non- negotiable.” Jacobs said the money raised by each centre is used within that community. In Killarney, the association contributed $450,000 towards a new pool and $350,000 towards the ice rink used during the 2012 Olympic Games.

“We do that gladly,” said Jacobs. “That money doesn’t go anywhere except this community.” Jacobs added the association is asking for the public to get involved with a “call to action.”

“We want people to write to the mayor, council and park board,” said Jacobs. “The councillors have told me this has nothing to do with them and that this is a park board issue, but that changed when Penny Ballem took over every meeting. The park board is no longer an independent body.”

But not all community centre associations are as concerned as Killarney about the proposed agreement. In a Jan. 22 email to Bromley, Michael Noon, president of the Roundhouse Community Centre Association, expressed gratitude to the general manager and park board staff for responding to concerns regarding staffing, programming and fundraising.

Vision Vancouver park board commissioner Niki Sharma said the goal of the proposed agreement is to bring all of the city’s community centres in line with the four priorities of its strategic plan. Those include providing accessibility for all, leading in green practices, engaging the public, and using existing resources effectively and efficiently.

Sharma said the practice by some associations of insisting users purchase individual memberships and refusing to honor the universal Leisure Access Card goes against the board’s priority of accessibility. The Leisure Access Card is available to low-income residents. “We want to ensure community centres are accessible to everyone and that they have the same level of service,” said Sharma. She added the park board wants to pool all of the money raised through programming and room rentals and distribute it amongst all of the community centres. “Under this current proposal they’d still have the ability to fundraise,” Sharma insisted.

The emergency meeting is at 7 p.m. Jan. 29, at the community centre, 6260 Killarney St.

sthomas@vancourier.com
twitter.com/sthomas10

© Copyright (c) Vancouver Courier

Vancouver’s annual lifeguard school begins January 8

January 3, 2013 

The Vancouver Park Board’s annual Lifeguard School begins January 8 at the Vancouver Aquatic Centre. The program provides lifeguard certification and recertification to update qualifications.

Now in its 77th year, the school provides comprehensive training for prospective and returning lifeguards interested in summer employment at Vancouver’s nine beaches and all indoor and outdoor pools.

The school is open to those with their Lifesaving Society's Bronze Medallion as well as qualified lifeguards. Lifeguard School graduates get priority consideration for jobs at Vancouver’s swimming pools and beaches. The training also qualifies participants to lifeguard anywhere in Canada.

Instructors with the Lifeguard School have a vast knowledge of lifeguard experiences and are professional educators in the fields of emergency services, first aid and aquatic administration.

To pre-register or for more information on becoming a lifeguard, review the Lifeguard School brochure at vancouver.ca.

- 30 -

Media contact:

Jason Watson

604-257-8438

Girl Rising: Make 2013 the year every girl can go to school.

Let's start the New Year off by spreading the message about girls' education. Join 10x10 and and get excited for Girl Rising. Find out more. Visit 10x10act.org/

 

Happy Holidays to all my readers

Safe travels.  
May the light that perpetually shines, light your way this holiday season and throughout the New Year.