11779 replies to this topic

[Midnightly]

while people are shocked over what happened someone asked Sarah Potts to weigh in since the first person to tweet to her had talked to her earlier this week at a rally against sexual violence and this was her response..

 

 

it floors me that she says what happened at beacon hill park could happen anywhere..as if a mansion and beacon hill park currently hold the same about of risk of being attacked...she just shrugs it off and refuses to accept that the reason this happened is highly likely a result of what is currently happening in the park.....that terrible violence happens every day and we should just accept it as part of life... we should not have to accept violence! we should feel safe to walk down our streets and not have to worry if we are going to be followed by some stranger who wants to jump us or sucker punch us in the face (both which have happened this month in the north park/quadra village area)

[Victoria Watcher]

Is this who BC Housing is looking to find homes for? 38-year-old men assault developmentally challenged youth, causing life-altering injuries?

Or are they seeking homes for the people who tried to keep the girl from being helped, and assaulted officers to protect the 38-year-old who had viscupusly assaulted a 15-year-old girl?

 

the victim was not a "girl".  at least not in the traditional sense.  

 

charles bodi says there are at least two other minors living in the camp.

 

this is why camps should NEVER be allowed for anyone.  it's a criminal free-for-all.

 

when just anybody can set up their "home" with no landlord or property-owner oversight it's very problematic.  for the safety of others including minors.  when we have people in charge of housing - landlords and property owners - there is natural checks and controls and oversight that is absolutely absent with camps.  that's what we don't allow them in most cases.  why we allow this one is beyond me.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 22 April 2021 - 05:31 AM.

[Awaiting Juno]

the victim was not a "girl".  at least not in the traditional sense.  

 

charles bodi says there are at least two other minors living in the camp.

 

this is why camps should NEVER be allowed for anyone.  it's a criminal free-for-all.

 

when just anybody can set up their "home" with no landlord or property-owner oversight it's very problematic.  for the safety of others including minors.  when we have people in charge of housing - landlords and property owners - there is natural checks and controls and oversight that is absolutely absent with camps.  that's what we don't allow them in most cases.  why we allow this one is beyond me.

 

It's also why traditional camping requires registration. The lack of regulation and oversight breeds crime and abuse. Those most vulnerable pay the brunt of the price.

[SimonH]

I have been shaking my head for several years.

It’s bad policy by Victoria to have all the services and resources in the city. We need to distribute. We can do that through incentives or otherwise. It needs to change. That’s what I’m saying.

Your council created and encouraged this mess. Your council can deal with it.

[kitty surprise]

I have been shaking my head for several years.

It’s bad policy by Victoria to have all the services and resources in the city. We need to distribute. We can do that through incentives or otherwise. It needs to change. That’s what I’m saying.

Help me understand. Many come here "because of the climate". Meaning they fully expect to be outdoors and homeless. Now homes are being provided to them, making the argument of climate no longer relevant. We all know providing homes here is way more expensive than in say, Prince George. So why can't homes and services be provided in cheaper places? Climate is not an argument they can use anymore. If they are fighting for free homes, then what does it matter if that climate-controlled home is in another cheaper location?

Edited by kitty surprise, 22 April 2021 - 12:05 PM.

[Victoria Watcher]

 If they are fighting for free homes, then what does it matter if that climate-controlled home is in another cheaper location?

 

our free homes now come with free on-site or catered/delivered meals.  you don't get that in most places in north america.  you go to the central soup kitchen downtown etc.  but we have stepped it up around here.

[Tom Braybrook]

while people are shocked over what happened someone asked Sarah Potts to weigh in since the first person to tweet to her had talked to her earlier this week at a rally against sexual violence and this was her response..

 

 

 

it floors me that she says what happened at beacon hill park could happen anywhere..as if a mansion and beacon hill park currently hold the same about of risk of being attacked...she just shrugs it off and refuses to accept that the reason this happened is highly likely a result of what is currently happening in the park.....that terrible violence happens every day and we should just accept it as part of life... we should not have to accept violence! we should feel safe to walk down our streets and not have to worry if we are going to be followed by some stranger who wants to jump us or sucker punch us in the face (both which have happened this month in the north park/quadra village area)

Attached Images

• 

[kitty surprise]

our free homes now come with free on-site or catered/delivered meals.  you don't get that in most places in north america.  you go to the central soup kitchen downtown etc.  but we have stepped it up around here.

 

But again when adjusting in the housing costs, it's still cheaper to provide housing - and these "services" - in a cheaper (housing) location.

 

I just want to understand why we are killing ourselves to provide housing for so many people who came here "because of the climate" when we could provide more (climate-controlled) homes and services more cheaply in cheaper locations.

[Victoria Watcher]

But again when adjusting in the housing costs, it's still cheaper to provide housing - and these "services" - in a cheaper (housing) location.

 

I just want to understand why we are killing ourselves to provide housing for so many people who came here "because of the climate" when we could provide more (climate-controlled) homes and services more cheaply in cheaper locations.

 

understandably, prince george or trail or cranbrook or salmon arm is not going to stand up and say "we want lots of those here!" like victoria has.  it's the politicians.  we have the worst ones right now.  the lot of them.

[A Girl is No one]

I see Ben is having fun on social media today.

I think it’s very disingenuous of Isitt to use these misleading stats.
1) rate or inflation alone doesn’t tell the whole story. We have to add the increase in population too. And it’s fair to say that on top of that, the makeup of the population has changed quite a bit over that time period as we continue to import more and more criminals/drug addicts/untreated mentally ill people to the city.
2) police charges have changed quite a bit over that time period. VicPD has become much more lax in enforcing the law in the last few years. Of course this would lead to a drop in charges. In addition, many people have quit even trying to get police help given the lack of response.
Shameful spin but not surprising at all coming from the ideologue Marxist.

[Mike K.]

It's an excellent lesson in how statistics and data can tell whatever story you want them to.

 

Missing from this graph is the provincial downloading of health plan payments to employers, with VicPD the only City of Victoria department not having this covered by the CoV, but having to pay for it from its budget. Also missing is the reduction in pursuing charges against minor drug-related crimes, or drug possession.

 

Now if the councillor was being sincere, he would enter these caveats into his graph, and would not cite "all" charges, but focus on the top-5 categories that matter.

[sebberry]

while people are shocked over what happened someone asked Sarah Potts to weigh in since the first person to tweet to her had talked to her earlier this week at a rally against sexual violence and this was her response..

 

potts.png

 

it floors me that she says what happened at beacon hill park could happen anywhere..as if a mansion and beacon hill park currently hold the same about of risk of being attacked...she just shrugs it off and refuses to accept that the reason this happened is highly likely a result of what is currently happening in the park.....that terrible violence happens every day and we should just accept it as part of life... we should not have to accept violence! we should feel safe to walk down our streets and not have to worry if we are going to be followed by some stranger who wants to jump us or sucker punch us in the face (both which have happened this month in the north park/quadra village area)

 

Potts is right, plenty of domestic abuse and assaults happen behind the closed doors of otherwise 'normal' appearing households.  The difference here is that the crimes taking place in these encampments have all but been given the green light from council.  Council needs to be accountable for what happens in the encampments they've helped create.  

[max.bravo]

^Not to mention CoV taxpayers are literally paying for the space on which these crimes are enabled to occur... in areas formerly enjoyed as public amenities.

At least Assault that occurs inside a private mansion is self funded and doesn’t require me to forego use of an amenity I’ve been paying for and reasonably expected to continue using.

[On the Level]

^Not to mention CoV taxpayers are literally paying for the space on which these crimes are enabled to occur... in areas formerly enjoyed as public amenities.

At least Assault that occurs inside a private mansion is self funded and doesn’t require me to forego use of an amenity I’ve been paying for and reasonably expected to continue using.

 

This needs to have the seriousness that it is.  This isn't about tax payers.  This isn't about homeless.  This isn't about rich people in mansions.  This isn't about amenities in parks. 

 

It is culpability in turning a blind eye to sexual violence with politics.  Lisa Helps and Elsner and now Sarah Potts and Crabb.  

Edited by On the Level, 22 April 2021 - 11:01 PM.

[kitty surprise]

This needs to have the seriousness that it is.  This isn't about tax payers.  This isn't about homeless.  This isn't about rich people in mansions.  This isn't about amenities in parks. 
 
It is culpability in turning a blind eye to sexual violence with politics.  Lisa Helps and Elsner and now Sarah Potts and Crabb.

Downplaying these heinous acts is the same thing as enabling them.

That's what Trump did. Doesn't matter what side of the political spectrum your on. A villain is a villain.

[Victoria Watcher]

Editorial: City councillors need to show support for the police and the people

 

Criminal behaviour and dysfunction have become intolerable in Beacon Hill Park, once the jewel of the entire region but now somewhere that, in places, many see as a dangerous no-go area.

 

 

Victoria’s city council members need to admit that, and to protect everyone — tenters, the surrounding community and, not least of all, the city’s own employees — from lawlessness. They need to show that they understand, assuming that they do, the misery and pain and fear.

 

https://www.timescol...ople-1.24310770

 

 

 

Enough is enough. The notion that a disparate bunch of people — some poor, some addicted, some with mental illness, some eager to prey on all the others — could be given effective control of the park without problems arising is utter nonsense.

 

Yet Coun. Sarah Potts sees it differently. She took to Twitter to say that she had proposed several motions that had not been supported by other councillors, and that we need more supports across the board. And this:

 

“Terrible violence happens every day, whether people are sheltering in parks or living in mansions.”

In other words, look away. Nothing to see at Beacon Hill Park.

 

But it’s worse than that.

 

Potts could have shown some empathy for the victim, but she chose not to. She could have shown support for Victoria police officers as well as paramedics, but she chose not to. She could have acknowledged that to many, Beacon Hill Park is no longer a safe place.

 

Instead, she tried to deflect attention away.

 

VicPD officers and other front-line staff are putting themselves at risk as they do all they can to keep the city safe. That they do not get support from city councillors is appalling.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 23 April 2021 - 05:15 AM.

[A Girl is No one]

Funny that Isitt complains about the cost of policing 2 cities for $60,000,000 annually (or $15M per quarter) when he got the equivalent of 3% of that ($400,000) to give off free coffee, rent and salary free to about 100 people.

[rmpeers]

Editorial: City councillors need to show support for the police and the people

Criminal behaviour and dysfunction have become intolerable in Beacon Hill Park, once the jewel of the entire region but now somewhere that, in places, many see as a dangerous no-go area.


Victoria’s city council members need to admit that, and to protect everyone — tenters, the surrounding community and, not least of all, the city’s own employees — from lawlessness. They need to show that they understand, assuming that they do, the misery and pain and fear.

https://www.timescol...ople-1.24310770



Enough is enough. The notion that a disparate bunch of people — some poor, some addicted, some with mental illness, some eager to prey on all the others — could be given effective control of the park without problems arising is utter nonsense.

Yet Coun. Sarah Potts sees it differently. She took to Twitter to say that she had proposed several motions that had not been supported by other councillors, and that we need more supports across the board. And this:

“Terrible violence happens every day, whether people are sheltering in parks or living in mansions.”
In other words, look away. Nothing to see at Beacon Hill Park.

But it’s worse than that.

Potts could have shown some empathy for the victim, but she chose not to. She could have shown support for Victoria police officers as well as paramedics, but she chose not to. She could have acknowledged that to many, Beacon Hill Park is no longer a safe place.

Instead, she tried to deflect attention away.

VicPD officers and other front-line staff are putting themselves at risk as they do all they can to keep the city safe. That they do not get support from city councillors is appalling.

Amazing to see the usual suspects (cycling advocates and other really great people) attacking the TC editorial on social media. Just when you think you've seen humanity at its worst, they go lower...

[Awaiting Juno]

Amazing to see the usual suspects (cycling advocates and other really great people) attacking the TC editorial on social media. Just when you think you've seen humanity at its worst, they go lower...

 

These same people will then attempt to slander if you have the audacity to block them on social media for their bullying behavior.  They don't just have a conversation - they'll swamp a feed and not think twice about it. What's ironic, is Sarah Potts' comment is of the same ilk as Mr. Andrew's - a definite mis-step. However, Mr. Andrew immediately recognized the need to recalibrate and apologized for his misunderstanding AND took action to make amends. Meanwhile, crickets from Ms. Potts. I know who I'd be faster to forgive on this.

[Awaiting Juno]

Potts published the following editorial in the TC today - what is awful is that there's a really astounding difference between this editorial and her actions while on council to date.  Actions that have included voting for 24/7 sheltering in our parks, voting to leave ACAB in a city sponsored mural, voting to deny requested increases to VicPd's budget, voting to continue with the Richardson St. project, voting to change Clover Point to limit access, voting to limit access to Beacon Hill Park, etc. What she neglects, is the track record of the current council to do just what she states shouldn't be done: Governing for the few not everyone.