3079 replies to this topic

[Tom Braybrook]

just in general; 

 

Professor Carlo Cipolla’s Basic Laws of Human Stupidity :

1. Everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals among us.
2. The probability that a certain person is stupid is independent of any other characteristic of that person.
3. A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person while deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses.
4. Non-stupid people always underestimate the damaging power of stupid individuals.
5. A stupid person is the most dangerous type of person.

[Stephen James]

SpyBlack: You are too circumspect in your assessment, for my taste, on this topic (meaning you may be more mature or well informed, or both   )

 

I believe that the Mayor and others have used in camera meetings to avoid shame and embarrassment, and to avoid sunlight on toxic, undemocratic decision making. I believe the City Family is nothing more than an extension of the same selfish cowardice. (Leaders have the courage to lead their ideas through transparent discussion.)

 

I believe we're hostage to the usual happy idiots who don't have the wit or courage to examine their own thoughts (ever), but reward their own passion with an echo chamber. Happy idiots in politics use every tool they can find because they don't understand that the ends do not justify the means (kindergarten level ethics), the profession attracts narcissists just like the police attract bullies, and winning is before policy.

 

On rare occasions we get the combination of "ambitious for the community, rather than ambitious for themselves" as well as enough political savvy to survive. (I genuinely believe Stephen Andrew is such a person btw.)

 

Any tool available in politics that can also be used to hide anything needs special attention from the community, 100% of the time. Accountability helps us be our best selves, myself included. I'll be forever grateful to the Grumpy Taxpayers for banging the drum about reporting voting and attendance.

Edited by Taco, 03 June 2022 - 09:51 AM.

[Spy Black]

Taco, I agree 100% with every line in your post ... especially where you note that such in-camera secrecy has taken place repeatedly, and to the detriment of voters who may be led to believe a candidate stands for one thing ... all the while that same candidate stands for the polar opposite when they're in-camera.

 

As well, any politician who has to go in-camera in an effort to maintain the appearance of somebody striving to make "middle of the road" decisions in the interest of all taxpayers, but actually making decisions in the service of only getting themselves re-elected ... probably doesn't deserve anybody's vote.

Edited by Spy Black, 03 June 2022 - 10:01 AM.

[Nparker]

...I'll be forever grateful to the Grumpy Taxpayers for banging the drum about reporting voting and attendance.

I just wish their efforts were rewarded with some semblance of thoughtful voting on the part of the electorate.

[Stephen Andrew]

I understand that Stephen has a bad case of covid and I wish him the best.

What bothers me about the recent flip flop is how it appears to have transpired. In the last COTW meeting the Mayor tried to get Stephen to change his vote by cutting a deal on timing of the public hearing. Ben correctly called a point of order and the Mayor acknowledged she was not allowed to do that. Stephen then voted in favour of sending the proposal back to staff.

Stephen has now said that his concerns over timing have been dealt with and he is in favour of bringing the motion back. Based on his comments it sounds like he had some sort of discussion with the Mayor (and perhaps other councilors) on this issue in private. That is not supposed to be how the process works. The COTW is the venue for discussing the merits of motions and amending them as needed.

Now I understand that this happens in other munis all of the time which is why their public meetings are like 5 minutes! Victoria however has upheld its rules fairly consistently over the years however.

I DO wish people would reach out to me and ask questions directly rather than sit in their armchairs and make up conspiracies.

I will explain MY reason for reconsidering the motion at the June 9 meeting. There is no pressure here.

There is no “flip flop”. People need to understand the process of council. A decision on Missing Middle will only be made following a public hearing.

I reiterate my position on significant policy change, “When we bring significant policy change to you, we will provide time and opportunity for proper engagement.”

If any side of this issue reads anything into my position than this statement, they’re delusional.

For your information, since I voted to refer the motion, I received more emails social media responses, and calls supporting that position than those who were opposed.

My phone numbers and emails are
Public - you can always reach out and I will respond.

Thank you

S

Edited by Stephen Andrew, 03 June 2022 - 10:12 AM.

[dasmo]

If it is thought that the majority of people want this then the true democratic way to prove it would be putting it to a referendum. You are in a position to put that forward! 

 

"Assent voting (or referendum) allows electors to vote on whether a proposal would move forward or not. Assent of the electors is obtained if a majority of the votes counted are in favour of the bylaw or question. Assent voting is conducted under the rules that generally apply to local elections

For example, if an issue is controversial, requires a significant contribution of taxpayers’ dollars, or is significant in scale or impact on the community, local governments may decide that it is more appropriate and cost-effective to proceed directly to assent voting."

 

https://www2.gov.bc....ting-referendum

[dasmo]

Maybe if enough VV'ers email you such a proposal could happen? stephen.andrew@victoria.ca 

[Barrrister]

Put me on the opposed side. I am sure that many of my neighbours who own rental properties are strongly in favor of this plan since upzoning is money in their pockets. it would be money in mine but I think it is bad public policy. If you really have to upzone, limit it to townhomes which are family friendly and not sixplexes. (developers will pick sixplexes over townhomes vitually every time. More profit.

[Victoria Watcher]

I suggested a non-binding referendum. That will also help show what areas most want it - or do not want it. Why force it on Rockland if James Bay wants it bad?

Also, let the election itself be the referendum. Candidates for and against can run on their position.

And/or finally, what’s so bad about waiting until after the election? Unless somehow you feel strongly that this council - and only this council - can make good decisions? Why would the next council be unable or unwilling to handle this topic?

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 03 June 2022 - 10:33 AM.

[dasmo]

Assent Voting: Processes &Considerations for Local Governments in British Columbia

 

https://www2.gov.bc....tices_guide.pdf

[Nparker]

...what’s so bad about waiting until after the election? Unless somehow you feel strongly that this council - and only this council - can make good decisions? Why would the next council be unable or unwilling to handle this topic?

This.

[Stephen James]

Taco, I agree 100% with every line in your post ... especially where you note that such in-camera secrecy has taken place repeatedly, and to the detriment of voters who may be led to believe a candidate stands for one thing ... all the while that same candidate stands for the polar opposite when they're in-camera.

 

As well, any politician who has to go in-camera in an effort to maintain the appearance of somebody striving to make "middle of the road" decisions in the interest of all taxpayers, but actually making decisions in the service of only getting themselves re-elected ... probably doesn't deserve anybody's vote.

Antisocial personality disorder: (aka psychopath/sociopath)

- regularly breaks or flouts the rules

- lies and deceives others

- little regard for the safety of others

- no remorse or guilt

 

At some point, someone that cold, calculating, manipulative, and unethical crosses a line. Not the first politician, certainly, and often a winning strategy.

[Stephen James]

Maybe if enough VV'ers email you such a proposal could happen? stephen.andrew@victoria.ca 

One of many choices on a decision matrix continuum. 

A public hearing, properly constituted, is not much different, except it leaves more doors open.

[dasmo]

One of many choices on a decision matrix continuum. 

A public hearing, properly constituted, is not much different, except it leaves more doors open.

Of course but... considering the general shift toward bureaucrats ruling instead of administrating I think bringing a decision like this to a truly democratic process might restore some faith in bureaucrats in general. 

Considering what happened with the bridge I think a non-binding vote is useless. And considering what is happening with the museum we need to start this type of process more often for big decisions... 

[Stephen James]

the general shift toward bureaucrats ruling instead of administrating 

I don't understand what this means.

Are you saying the councillors are just figureheads for bureaucracy, and they answer to the staff?

[dasmo]

I don't understand what this means.
Are you saying the councillors are just figureheads for bureaucracy, and they answer to the staff?

It means our elected officials need to return to the thinking that they are serving the people. They are administering our tax dollars to be put to the best public use. What has evolved is more of a ruling class…

[lanforod]

Being in Saanich, I have less skin in this than many here, but can voice my thoughts.

 

Why is moving something to public hearing such a big uproar? This is not approved until the final vote. Any of the councillors can change their mind based on information and feedback they read or hear between now and that final vote.

 

You folks can say its a done deal all you want, but its not, until that vote passes or fails.

[Victoria Watcher]

It’s a massive change. The largest EVER sweeping change to zoning in the city’s history.

The public that weighed in was 800, and unknown their motives or residence.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 03 June 2022 - 12:27 PM.

[Nparker]

...You folks can say its a done deal all you want, but its not, until that vote passes or fails.

With at least half of this council, public hearings are for show only. They have already made up their minds.

[dasmo]

It's a huge deal and under the veil of lowering house prices it would garner support for sure. But...

Maybe Upzoning Doesn't (Always) Lead To Lower Home Prices

A new study published in Urban Affairs Review, an academic journal of urban studies, may alter the prevailing narrative. Yonah Freemark, a doctoral student in urban planning at MIT, evaluated the impact of upzonings near transit stops in Chicago neighborhoods, first in 2013 and later in 2015, to see if they had any impact on housing development. His hypothesis was that upzoning would increase the likelihood that housing development would occur, and that prices and rents would begin to fall.

Freemark came to two very surprising conclusions. First, he found that, over the five year period, relaxed zoning regulations had no impact on housing supply. The message was sent to the developer community to build more units in high-demand areas, and they did not respond. Freemark does acknowledge that the five-year timeframe might not be long enough to witness any significant changes (and I'd add that in a Chicago where demand is lower than in many other cities, it probably takes more time). Perhaps more surprisingly, however, Freemark found that instead of falling prices, housing prices rose on upzoned properties

 

https://www.forbes.c...sh=33619cd24dd3