Comments?

Email

e-princerupert.com

Prince Rupert Regional Information Site

NATURE

Sea, land, river

PEOPLES

Community

For earlier materials see Table of Contents

October 31^st	We See
	Reviewing last Council meeting

Scary Times --- Zeno and staff taking over while Council ‘sleeps’?

And see below for Reporting ---- we used to have much more but under Howie regime slowly disappeared to where even Council does not see much

More on this later --- But one of the Council candidates said they would do more than just sit (in Council) and ‘nod there heads yes’ to everything put forward by staff

Problems with the Delegation Bylaw --- sorry I did not get this up sooner ----- But I suggest proposed Bylaw needs serious ‘re-think’ ---- open to potential abuse --- plus poorly written (in my opinion)

Below follows the discussion at last Council meeting – where can be followed online if wish --- starting at 28:20 (see link below) n --- I am also concerned that the ‘power to supplement a Bylaw’ clause amounts to a Variance (below) --- which is illegal to delegate – whatever needs more discussion n Note (below) the very good discussion on how to Delegate etc by Province --- which means that need to write into present Bylaw the mechanism for ‘reconsideration’ n Council and Citizens need some sort of mechanism to follow what has been ‘given’ by planner --- Development Permit areas include not only Downtown --- See the list below (plus see my links to previous)

—Video 10B begins at ---28:20 For me this Bylaw is open to abuse --- if not by present planner then someone in the future --- ‘Power to supplement a bylaw’ --- any Bylaw? What does ‘supplement’ mean legally? Doesn’t the wording contravene the spirit of the relevant section in Community Charter The issue is more complex than Mussallem’s ‘natural justice’ comment --- see especially the ‘Delegation’ link below to BC site--- and the legal text (below)

This was passed with little discussion

Consultations (with builders) from year and half ago –‘they’ suggested that amount where need go to Council for approval was restrictive thus suggest 100T$--(-Issue came up at July 25^th Council see below (and then it was only downtown not all DPAs) -- that required change to Bylaw – only applies to DPAs not Variances etc –) Ashley asks first question – (30:28) Mussallem counters that the ‘process of natural justice’ allows for that that Council would still be able to intervene if an applicant disagreed with Planner’s interpretation

Note that Schedule C has already been amended (types of cladding etc) --- and now the Increased staff authority will get required changes	Here is the July 25^th DP that went to Council—and date July 25^th used in Delegation Bylaw (retroactively)

How quickly things change – the signage was only valued at 30T$ --- and by late summer was irrelevant when Target took over	Here is March when 30T$ DPA needed Council approval --- at time seemed a waste of Council time for so minor a decision

–See this overview of Delegation on BC Charter web site Communications: reporting responsibilities from the delegated body to council and vice versa. Specifically, does the delegation bylaw provide for: all relevant information necessary for making an informed decision to be received by the delegated body; and regular reporting from the delegated body to council

Which prompts Councillor Garon (31:00) to ask if Council could be made aware (of those turned down)–‘some sort of tool if that person turned down’---- Gordon Howie assured them staff will, but does not give mechanism Worse – from openness and accountability perspective: this includes only denials not those ‘given’– needs to be public not just Council

This is on Delegation in Community Charter Section 156

So much for ‘Mussallem’s ‘natural justice’ argument --- though might need a more legal opinion --- still looks like a procedure should be part of the present ‘proposed’ Bylaw --- Below excerpted from Charter

Reconsideration of delegate's decisions (1) A council may, by bylaw, establish a right to have decisions delegated under this Division reconsidered by council. (2) If (a) a council delegates a power to make a decision, and (b) in relation to that delegation, a provision of this or another Act, or a bylaw under subsection (1), establishes a right to have a delegated decision reconsidered by the council, the council must, by bylaw, establish procedures for such a reconsideration, including how a person may apply for the reconsideration

Here is he Source link on City’s site	Development Permits delegation involves more than just Downtown
	Schedule “A” Zoning Map Schedule “B” Cow Bay Development Permit Area Schedule “C” Downtown Development Permit Area Schedule “D” Industrial Site Development Permit Area – Zoning Amendment Bylaw No. 3290, 2010 Schedule “E” Multi-Family Housing Development Permit Area – Zoning Amendment Bylaw No. 3290, 2010

	Speaking of Reporting back
	These ‘Priority Focus Areas’ were supposed to be a mechanism for Howie to ‘Report’ to Council --- Last one I saw was in June --- Suggest they should be on internet for everyone to see --- and of course the Priority Focal Areas lack a metric to decide/ measure how each topic being dealt with

	Long term infrastructure plan
	Council spoke of this and the ‘workshop with staff’ over last few meetings – but none of the contents revealed to mere Citizens/ Taxpayers– other than the high priority of water supply from Woodsworth/ Shawatlans should be dealt with before the Roads etc

Here are some of my links to relevant pages where discussed ‘Reporting’ to Council and Community	A little History
	This page goes back to October 2006 --- when information slowly being eroded --- the previous meeting had proposed the new City web site – which was to function as a conduit to public Here goes back to 2003 when RCMP etc used to come to Council to ‘report’ Perhaps it is mere coincidence – but I see Gordon Howie showing up about the time of ‘erosion’ --- Staff knows best etc

Created by LG on October 30, 2011

Last updated on Saturday, November 12, 2011