143 replies to this topic

[Victoria Watcher]

websites don’t build themselves. first you need to get onto the “internet”. that’s not cheap.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 18 April 2020 - 02:47 PM.

[spanky123]

websites don’t build themselves. first you need to get onto the “internet”. that’s not cheap.

 

Looks like they just used a squarespace template. Must be an error, can't see how it could have cost more than a couple thousand to do a few pages with stock images and a hosted service.

[Sparky]

Looks like they just used a squarespace template. Must be an error, can't see how it could have cost more than a couple thousand to do a few pages with stock images and a hosted service.

I have built a number of web pages for nothing and next to nothing. I use to use the Weebly platform when it was free for the asking but now I use Interserver and pay very little... but it has email, file storage and all sorts of other cool stuff.

If you can copy and paste.....you too can be a nerd.

Thousand$ is just not nessesary.

[Mike K.]

Oh yeah, that doesn’t make sense for the website. But they did run quite a lot of CFAX ads.

[Jackerbie]

It's not just a website, it's poor reporting. The staff report starts on Page 28 of the Council agenda, here: https://www.langford... (REDACTED).pdf

 

This is the breakdown of the $100,000 spent on the COVIDLangford.com initiative, which includes a lot more than just a website:

Edited by Jackerbie, 20 April 2020 - 07:40 AM.

[Mike K.]

Weren’t we just saying how you can’t believe so much of what the media reports?

Here’s a clear example of that.

But even $10k is a lot for what that website is, unless it needed a substantial amount of back-end infrastructure to tie everything together in a custom way (off the shelf can work, sometimes, and not quite as well as someone desires).

[spanky123]

Weren’t we just saying how you can’t believe so much of what the media reports?

Here’s a clear example of that.

But even $10k is a lot for what that website is, unless it needed a substantial amount of back-end infrastructure to tie everything together in a custom way (off the shelf can work, sometimes, and not quite as well as someone desires).

 

If you look at the website I don't think there was much backend work required!

 

The whole project was announced with the prospect of donors covering the cost. The gofundme page has raised $17K of the $100K goal. With 30 people tested and a few calls that could just as easily been handled by the existing Provincial system, this was not a good use of taxpayer money.

Edited by spanky123, 20 April 2020 - 07:58 AM.

[Mike K.]

No, I guess not. It was quite ambitious for what it ultimately ended up providing as we had far, far fewer local cases than authorities told us to brace for.

So if we agree that Langford went in too heavy, we have to also acknowledge that authorities went in too heavy as Langford’s effort was a direct response to what had been forecasted.

[Jackerbie]

Honestly the most intriguing part is that the staff report names the two project leads: Mike Forbes and Dr. JP Lim

[Victoria Watcher]

Honestly the most intriguing part is that the staff report names the two project leads: Mike Forbes and Dr. JP Lim

 

yes the two pot/opioid guys that never miss a crisis.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 20 April 2020 - 09:05 AM.

[marks_28]

Not the biggest fan of the Grumpy Taxpayers, but Stan Bartlett makes some good points in his recent TC op-ed.

Basically, around here at least, Langford is seen as a model for how to run a municipality, and we mostly hear just good things about Stu “Gets Stuff Done” Young. Yet their council has close to no transparency. No council meetings are webcast, you aren’t able to speak at a council meeting if you wanted to, minutes are often brief and not posted online until a month later, and furthermore:

“they do not provide a link to mayor and council’s annual filings every January mandated under the B.C. Financial Disclosure Act. By listing assets, liabilities and sources of income, it allows residents to spot any potential conflicts of interest. It’s impossible to view these documents — that’s the alternative — when city hall is closed for business. We know of no large jurisdiction or progressive municipality aside from Langford that’s so reluctant to inform residents."

All this while the biggest complaint we hear over here is that the CoV does zero consultation with their residents, when it seems things are far worse over there. Why does Langford get a pass? Because people here think they’re doing a good job? No concern at all about what might be going on behind closed doors? What potential conflicts of interest there might be with certain councillors? Just seems a strange double standard.

https://www.timescol...ning-1.24261182

[On the Level]

I agree that Langford should be streaming their meeting online, but look who exactly is complaining?  It's the anti-development crowd.  You know, the ones that are jacking up the price of housing, driving down density and making bike lanes uneconomical.  

[LJ]

I agree that Langford should be streaming their meeting online, but look who exactly is complaining?  It's the anti-development crowd.  You know, the ones that are jacking up the price of housing, driving down density and making bike lanes uneconomical.  

I agree. I wouldn't watch it if it was live streamed.

 

Most people are pretty happy that Langford sticks to its knitting and gets things done in the community.

[Mike K.]

If it wasn’t for Grumpy Taxpayers raising this issue, would the broader population have really cared? They’ve been raising the issue for many months now.

People are happy with the way Langford is conducting its affairs, for the most part, and when it comes to council or committee minutes not just agendas, those can be months behind anywhere in the region.

[On the Level]

Just to be clear, Langford meetings are open to the public through means like teleconferencing.  Go to the city hall website to see how you can attend. 

 

It's not as if they are doing the steady stream of "in camera" meetings Helps is currently orchestrating to hide things that the Community Charter states must be held in public.   

[Midnightly]

Langford mayor and council seem to stay in their lane, get the job done and don't make waves.... they seem to prioritize the needs of the city without any other agenda... where Victoria mayor and council seem to do the opposite..  if Victoria council didn't continually make the news for outlandish things (drama over the statue, the huge pay raise want, the bike lanes, anti-christmas, attacking the horse/carriage industry twice! the endless tent cities, the bridge... i'm sure i could go on), for trying to do things that are not within the municipality (the most recent TC article says helps want to set up an island wide climate action plan), if they listened to their people (and not shrug off a petition with over 28,000 signatures calling them haters) then maybe people wouldn't be so vocal

[spanky123]

If it wasn’t for Grumpy Taxpayers raising this issue, would the broader population have really cared? They’ve been raising the issue for many months now.

People are happy with the way Langford is conducting its affairs, for the most part, and when it comes to council or committee minutes not just agendas, those can be months behind anywhere in the region.

 

I think people are happy because Stu and company have been smart enough to take care of the things that matter to most people, clean streets, safe streets and paved streets! 

 

It is not all roses however. We have Danbrook One which has now sat empty for a year and has embroiled the City in a lawsuit over some of the alleged shortcuts the City takes to get projects approved. We have had several community groups in recent years complain about a complete lack of consultation on rezonings and development permits. Remember the $25M that Langford had to pony up for the Bear Mountain Parkway when their great "deal" with Len Barrie went bust. 

 

Livestreaming a council meeting is trivial.  

[Mike K.]

The $25M is being paid back by developers through DCCs. Plenty of municipalities took a hit when the market crashed in 08, and Langford wasn’t immune.

Danbrook One could have happened anywhere, and I can guarantee you the thousands of un permitted secondary suites within the City of Victoria or within Saanich or within Esquimalt pose a greater risk than a tower that was built to an older standard (it’s not like the building is going to collapse). Keep in mind we have towers with 50s technology and engineering downtown and in other neighbourhoods and nobody’s concerned.

I’m not here to defend Langford but we have to dig pretty deep to consider the above examples as evidence of major mismanagement, especially in light of what Victoria’s politicians have orchestrated in their municipality increasingly with decisions made behind closed doors and completely out of the public eye.

[spanky123]

^ Langford borrowed the $25M (essentially on Len's behalf) to build the parkway and the money was supposed to be secured against the BM lands. We have been hearing for nearly a decade how the money is supposed to be repaid. I doubt anyone bothers to look anymore.

 

You may know more of the details behind Danbrook One then I do but Langford is part of the litigation. The story out of Langford has been that this is a minor, unimportant issue, but there is $33M at stake so it may actually become signficant for the taxpayers.

[Mike K.]

The money is being repaid by the developments that are rising on Skirt Mountain and the general area. It won't happen over night but the DCCs are in place and plenty of development is occurring.

 

None of us can speak to the Danbrook situation because the public is not privy to the information, but it's hardly a family discussion topic on the West Shore. There are other issues in this region regarding inspection misshaps, believe me.