95 replies to this topic

[G-Man]

Minutes are up from the meeting last week:

Some errors in there they seem not as comprehensive as they have in the past.

http://www.victoria.ca/contentmanager/minutes/min070222_cnc.pdf

[Holden West]

Council coverage desired

We live in Fairfield and would love to have more coverage of Thursdays’ Victoria city council meetings, what issues were discussed, what development approvals were granted, and initiatives that were introduced. Council meetings are not well-covered by any of our local news media despite the fact they influence so much of our daily lives.

Ali and Ivan Carlson

Victoria

© Copyright 2007 Victoria News

[G-Man]

They should look beyond the realm of the printed page. I think there is at least one source out there that covers Victoria Council pretty well. Of course there is an inherent bias

[m0nkyman]

10. Council Remuneration
It was moved by Councillor Chandler, seconded by Councillor Holland, that Council approve:
1. Effective February 22, 2007, increasing the annual remuneration of Mayor and Council to
the average of the Municipalities surveyed (i.e. Mayor from $66,789 to $74,458 and
Councillors from $21,236 to $25,878). Carried
Councillors Coleman, Thornton-Joe and Young voted against this motion

It was moved by Councillor Chandler, seconded by Councillor Hughes, that Council:
2. Implement the recommendations of the Council Remuneration Committee in January
2009. Carried
Councillor Young voted against this motion

Hmmm. Nice of them to do this when the main story is the Hudson. Cute.

[G-Man]

Still a pretty crappy wage when you consider it IMO.

[m0nkyman]

Theoretically it's a part time job.

[G-Man]

Thursday, March 15, 2007 Committee of the Whole

Some interesting things are coming up

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
2. Rezoning Application # 00116 for 734-736 Broughton Street-- A. Hudson, Senior Planner

3. Rezoning Application # 00112 for 427 Government Street
-- B. Sikstrom, Senior Planner
)
4. Development Permit # 000072 for 755 Caledonia Avenue (“The
Radius”)
-- A. Hudson, Senior Planner

5. Heritage Alteration Permit # 00055 for 1007 Johnson Street
-- S. Barber, Senior Heritage Planner

6. Owner Request for Heritage Designation for 1271 Faithful Street
-- S. Barber, Senior Heritage Planner

7. Fairfield Heritage Registry Update
-- R. Linzey, Heritage Planner

8. Dockside Green Ltd. – Biomass Facility-- D. Koch, Manager Development Services

[Rob Randall]

There are some meetings today, Thursday June 28 at City Hall.

A special noon meeting of the Committee of the Whole will hear the Planning Department recommendations regarding possible expansion of the Downtown boundaries. Also on the agenda is the new interim Bonus Density Policy. The public is allowed to attend but not to speak at Committee of the Whole meetings. This is part of the City's review of the Downtown Plan. Documents regarding a new height policy can be found here:

http://www.victoria.... ... ntrm.shtml

In a nutshell, what they are proposing is putting into policy what they are already doing with certain residential highrises--allowing a height increase of up to 35% but only in the north east portion of the Downtown Core--ie, not in Chinatown or Old Town or the waterfront.

Then at 3 pm there will be a special Council Meeting to deal with the new nuisance bylaw. This is related to issues like the late night eateries on Wharf Street you may have heard about. The unusual time of this meeting is to accommodate the restaurants who may be affected.

Then at 7:30 pm the regular Council Meeting takes place. Items of interest to Downtown residents include:

1) A hearing to determine if the Big Bus tour company should have its license revoked or suspended. You may have noticed their large open-air diesel buses with recorded announcements circling through your neighbourhood.

2) A request for a change in the liquor license for Topo's restaurant on Wharf at the foot of Yates.

Also, I understand the height policy guidelines will be on the agenda, although it is not mentioned on the City's website.

[aastra]

In a nutshell, what they are proposing is putting into policy what they are already doing with certain residential highrises--allowing a height increase of up to 35% but only in the north east portion of the Downtown Core--ie, not in Chinatown or Old Town or the waterfront.

This is very good, don't you think?

[m0nkyman]

I'd prefer that they had come up with a process for addressing height variances rather than just resetting things to a new hard limit. It just means we'll be having the same fights in another few years.

[Mike K.]

^but it ensure planners have something to do!

[VicHockeyFan]

Coming October 3 to a computer near you. Victoria City Council meetings online. Like reality TV. But actually real.

Y7VQPXuXAak#t=27

[G-Man]

Geez that was dramatic. I mean it is good but what a crazy way to say it.

[Bob Fugger]

Geez that was dramatic. I mean it is good but what a crazy way to say it.

They shamelessly ripped off another overly dramatic trailer from some other Canadian municipality that went viral earlier this year. I expected more from such a minted communications department. Oh wait, no I didn't: All Star salaries for Bush League antics.

[VicHockeyFan]

A consultant’s report on restructuring city operations was substantially altered between the time a draft version hit the former city manager’s office and the time the final report was presented to Victoria council, says Coun. Ben Isitt.

Isitt used a freedom-of-information request to obtain the draft report, dated May 31, that Maximus Canada provided to former city manager Gail Stephens. He compared it with the final report presented to council in June and maintains major changes were made.

“Specifically, the final report omitted the consultant’s two main recommendations: to consolidate city operations into six departments; and to create a stand-alone asset management function,” Isitt says in a report to be presented to councillors today. “The final report also introduced new recommendations that were not present in the draft report, including eliminating positions within the city’s sustainability function.”

Isitt now wants to see an uncensored version of the draft; parts were blacked out in the copy he received.

http://www.timescolo...t-says-1.647140


I'm unclear why Isitt has to FOI this. They (councillors) can't see City Hall ordered documents/reports just by asking?

[spanky123]

http://www.timescolo...t-says-1.647140


I'm unclear why Isitt has to FOI this. They (councillors) can't see City Hall ordered documents/reports just by asking?

Probably used the FOI process so that he could make the document public. He obviously knew about the document and changes in order to request it.