Frances Bula header image 2
← →

Mayor’s blunder helps West End group score a victory

July 12th, 2010 · 12 Comments

The story of the mayor’s use of the F word while referring to West End residents has been a rolling story all day. Here’s the latest version with stuff I gathered over the past few hours.

Categories: Uncategorized

  • Booge

    oh my. how sanctimonious folks can get when politics are involved. the public is so two faced. They go to hollywood movies where “fuck” is the word of the day, but if Hiz honour uses it … oh my the heavens must open and smote him down. fick heads all!

  • Richard

    So has it come to this. Instead of debating issues, we are resorting to American style “gotcha politics”. It is really painful watching TV from the states and have them tediously parse people’s every word. Yes, the Mayor’s comments were not appropriate but lets move on and discuss the issues before we all go down the YouTube.

  • Terrence

    The mayor’s potty-mouth vulgarity is NOT the issue – the mayor’s arrogant dismissal of the peasants who do not agree with his enlightened view is the problem.

    Claiming the poor dear thing was “tired” does not justify his arrogant disregard of those who do not agree with hiz honour.

  • jesse

    Would Larry Campbell have been treated the same way? I remember his language wasn’t always free of expletives.

    I really wonder if if Robertson replaced the f-word with “darn” would this have turned out the same? I doubt it. But it also uncovered how weak and hasty the council really was on this whole effort.

  • Bill Smolick

    Larry Campbell was incapable of putting together a sentence without an f-bomb.

  • xnexus

    Sigh….the spin has been going all day…no one cares about the f-bomb. What people are up in arms about is the “discovery” that community consultation is a complete sham, and that the decisions have been by Vision long before.

  • MB

    No, xnexus, it’s not soley about community consultation processes either. It’s about creating a rental housing stock in the West End. That is the core issue. The rest is equally politics and the Gong Show.

    I for one agree with a process that sees an advisory group that reflects in precise proportions the rental + owner make-up in any neighbourhood where building more rentals is warranted. Investment owners who rent suites out iindividually should be accounted for in the process too.

  • Bill Smolick

    >No, xnexus, it’s not soley about community consultation processes either.

    No, it’s not solely about anything. That’s the true damage though: the implication is that he just didn’t care what the group had to say.

    There may be valid reasons for that. Maybe it’s a group of single issue ranters who aren’t willing to listen to or engage in any discussion that doesn’t involve an complete acceptance of their view point (I’m looking at you Mt. Pleasant Pool group)

    The point is that people need to BELIEVE that their politicians are listening to them, and Gregor’s comments create the impression that he’s not.

    That belief is what got Obama elected. It’s also what got Gregor elected: I didn’t know what he was going to do, but I knew for damn sure that the NPA wasn’t going to listen. Why would anybody vote for somebody who doesn’t give a damn what they think?

  • Bill Smolick

    The f-bomb will blow over. I don’t like excessive swearing, but fundamentally a certain level of it’s just faded into our language. You seriously think next election the Vancouver Sun is going to lead with “Would you vote for a guy who swore in council chambers?” The Province.

    Well, maybe the province. Except it would more likely read “Gregore swore in council. Don’t vote for that asshole.”

  • Living in the West End

    Frances, Googling 745 Thurlow rezoning will take you to the City rezoning application for a new office building (400,000+ sq.ft) to be built across the street from the Westbank/Peterson Shangri-La development and next door to the Peterson Carmana Plaza rental residential building currently operating mostly as a hotel without a development permit. This is the same codeveloper who has applied to build an equally large rental residential building on Comox. I wonder why Vision has not drawn attention to the removal of the Carmana Plaza rental units from the available rental stock. Two other West End hotel operators (Pacific Palisades and Coast Plaza) have applied to the City to convert to rental residential use. In total the three hotels upon conversion would add over 700 new rental residential units to the West End. Add that to the existing vacancies and you have a substantial pool of older and newly renovated units to meet the needs of all ends of the rental market in the West End. To really gauage the rental situation, I encourage you to read The Goodman Reports available from their website.

  • victor

    Living in the West End has a really good point.

    And the proposed rentals under the STIR program are not going to be “affordable housing” but tiny suites at full market rates.

    So how much new rental stock does the West End really require?

  • Bill McCreery

    Let’s look @ some facts —
    1] Announced STIR rents will be $2.70 / SF.; average WE rents are $1.50 to $2.00.
    2] $2.70 / SF is not ‘affordable’ when compared to the averages.
    3] Financial analysis will reveal the developer / investor is renting @ retail rates in spite of a $5.45M direct giveaway by the City.
    4] When a large number of higher priced units come on stream in a market catchment it has the overall effect of increasing rents, creating a less affordable supply, the opposite from the intended.
    5] Having reviewed the proposed STIR suite design, square footages & rents it is my opinion that these rents may well not be achievable. Not withstanding they are new product, they do not offer renters enough for what they have to pay in rent. There is also a surplus of condo rentals for renters to choose from instead. If I were a developer / investor I would be very nervous about putting my money into such dubious ventures.

    Does this then mean we will see the developer / investors coming back to Council in 3 to 5 years crying for more concessions &/or to be released from their rental covenants? I’d put money on it.