Nov 19 NOTES
Calendar to Dec 8th

by Carolanne Reynolds, Editor

YOUR MONEY! Read MidYear Financial Review (item 8 Nov 19): budgets over by million dollars! Do taxpayers just pay? do depts take responsibility and adjust? Ccl knew in July. You've been told Nov 19 and have a week.  You are to speak up or pay up Monday!
HERITAGE UPDATE: still trying to find an offer the owners cdn't possibly refuse so they'll value the Graham residence and its place in Canadian architecture; had hoped they'd regard it as an honour and prestigious to own and care for such a unique, significant, and beautiful home.  Contact: heritage@westvan.org or 922 4400
= MAIN ITEMS Ccl Mtg Nov 26th: Black Bear Network; Cmnty Ctr Governance; Cmnty Survey 2007; Dog-Walking; Cmnty Heritage Register; Hollyburn Lodge; Wetmore Site (lease/sale?); Cmnty Engagement; Shell Gas Stn; Five-Year Financial Plan (public input); Ccl Procedure Bylaw; Correspondence: Qs asked re Ccl Procedure Bylaw Nov 19, not yet answered
ANIMALWATCH; gRUMBLINGs (whose responsibility for budget overruns? F&A mtg closed, shd hv bn open!); UPDATES (WVPD & WVFD $1M+ over budget, Rodgers Crk up to 678 units?, Design Review Volunteers, what's receipt?, unanswered Ccl Procedure bylaw questions); BOOKWATCH (Day of Empire -- imperial ingestion); CALENDAR to Dec 8th
=  Nov 19 Ccl NOTES: Shell Stn PH closed; Youth Safe House; great Child Care WG recommendations (point of order debated); 866 20th DVP; Ccl Procedure Bylaw (more debate on what receipt means); Mid-Year Review and Five-Year Financial Plan ($1M+ shortfall known in July, now we find out with one week to comment!!!); 2396/2388 Marine Dec 10; Zoning (in)consistency; 5517 Ocean Place DVP; PQP: Wetmore, Ccl Procedures
=  Nov 26th Ccl AGENDA; Erickson Update; THEATREWATCH: Tideline tanka; Quotations
~~  IRISH DANCING SEA LION -- At SeaWorld San Diego, Clyde and an award-winning Irish dancer go flipper to toe in one of the most unusual yet hilarious dance contests this St. Patrick's Day. http://www.videovat.com/ug6850/Irish-Dancing-Sea-Lion.aspx
~~ Cat and Dolphin: http://www.videovat.com/ug6458/Cat-Meets-Dolphin.aspx
~~ Kittens 'adopted' by pet rabbit -- Six tiny abandoned kittens find an unexpected new mother figure in Aberdeen - a pet rabbit. http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/north_east/7101506.stm
===   gRUMBLINGs   ===
*  ACCOUNTABILITY -- shd the taxpayer always just simply pay?
If a Board or dept exceeds funds allocated by over half a million dollars, who takes responsibility?  the taxpayer? shd dept pay it back over the next few years? shd those who made mistakes or bad decisions, exhibited bad judgement, or whatever be embarrassed enough to resign? or will the taxpayers just pay the extra per cent or two added to the budget without a murmur or without a question, take if from a 'surplus', without examining process and/or who shd be accountable and pay the price?
Watch for a substantial budget/tax rate hike for 2008.
*  OPENNESS, MY EYE! -- Finance & Audit Cmte mtg Nov 20
Public excluded but In Camera section not known or moved -- so didn't apply???
Mtgs behind closed doors continue, alas, despite protestations to the contrary to citizens.  The Chair came to invite me in, two of us sat outside until after the auditors (legitimately in camera) met with F&A, but when I got up, I was told no, not allowed, closed.  (There was a brief public mtg after Synovate left.) The Mayor was in attendance.  Looks like budget information for residents has been further delayed.  When? I again urged some broad bits at least asap.  At end of mtg, I asked under what section the cmnty survey had been discussed in camera b/c it didn't qualify in my opinion.  No one cd answer.  That's what makes me think they also hadn't followed required procedure -- a motion has to be made citing the section and then a vote taken before going in camera.
Of course, this is not the only time we've discovered this but we had hoped with all the talk of openness, inclusion, involvement, that it had actually stopped.  Nope.  Secrecy is just too tempting to some.
Will any mbr of Ccl make a public commitment not to go in camera or close a mtg without legal justification?
and carry through?
......rather than just preferring to talk about something in private.  Makes a mockery of how we think democracy 'by the ppl' is supposed to work........
===   UPDATES   ===
>  WVPD -- $600K+ OVER budget
owing to 'legal costs, severance, recruitment' -- the Police Board's decision/mistake, not Ccl's, and now taxpayers pay?  Cclrs V and Smith not so sure.  Ccl debate Nov 26th.
Also: WV against regional policing, new chief for regional policing, prov against/for, over to Board!  Ccl has no say 'over' Police Dept.  What does WV really really really want?
>  WVFD -- $500K+ OVER budget -- Firefighters and overtime: for discussion re Financial Plan on Mon 26th too.
> RODGERS Crk PLAN from 524 to 678 units or more? but same FAR for more choice?
>  West Vancouver Community Survey 2007 - Results
Synovate (formerly "MarkTrend Research Inc.") was commissioned to conduct the above mentioned surveys since 1991, including this year's Community Survey for the District of West Vancouver. This report contains the detailed findings from this most recent study and, where applicable, compares findings to historical data as far back as 1983.
Some highlights of the report:
*  The majority of West Vancouver residents feel the community offers a high quality of life, is a good place to raise a family and is a good place to retire.
*  Consistent with trends dating back to 2001, the large majority of West Vancouver residents say they are very to somewhat satisfied overall with municipal services.
*  Municipal services that residents tend to recognize (i.e. they are the most satisfied with) are library services (mentioned by 45%, fire and rescue services (40%) and garbage collection (37%).  
*  Unchanged from historical trends, 86% of West Vancouver homeowners currently feel they get good value for the municipal share of their property taxes
Download the full report from: http://www.westvancouver.ca/upload/documents/community%20survey/2007_COMMUNITY_SURVEY_FINAL_REPORT_-_NOV_16_07.pdf
> VOLUNTEER for a cmte or working group [Applications accepted year round; vacancies from time to time]
DWV is asking for applicants for the Design Review Cmte by Nov 30:
The Design Review Committee is a standing committee of Council that provides recommendations on policies and regulations affecting buildings, site development, and urban design, and on the design merits, and physical and aesthetic impact of proposed development plans and major infrastructure projects.  If you are a WV resident and would like to volunteer to serve on this Committee, application forms are available at Municipal Hall in Legislative Services, and on-line at westvancouver.ca/committees  Mail, fax, or deliver completed applications, with a brief personal resume, to the Legislative Services Department, or email to committees@westvancouver.ca and for more info, call 925 7237.
Please separate all green waste from your normal garbage year-round and be sure to put leaves and tree debris out for collection.  For more information, visit www.nsrp.ca or call 925 7176.
Prevent flooding by monitoring the street drains in front of your property and keeping them clear of tree debris if needed. If a stream runs through your property, monitor water levels and report concerns to 925 7100.
>  Join Team Powersmart for Your Municipality
The District of West Vancouver has registered for Phase 2 of the 'Turn it off Challenge for Local Government' -- Join Team Power Smart.  Now, the work begins -- tell your friends and family about Team Power Smart and get them to sign up online at www.bchydro.com  Then, have them tell their friends and family and so forth until our entire community is registered.
Why? The BC community that has the highest percentage of account holders join Team Power Smart by December 15th will win a $20,000 Power Smart makeover of a municipal building in their community! And that makes us all winners.

>>>  WHAT'S RECEIPT??? [from a Correspondent/Contributor]
Both Cclrs Sop and Vaughan raise the question of what, exactly, is meant when Council "receives" a report. Staff give a partial answer but are reluctant to put a definition in the Ccl Procedure Bylaw or to explain fully what it means (or, more accurately, how staff like to interpret receipt). As will be pointed out in a future WVM, some groups have exploited Council's "receipt" of a report as Council approval. So does "receipt" mean approval or not?
The critical difference lies in whether the report discusses matters within the purview of staff or those that require action by Council. If Council receives a report that outlines possible staff actions, then receiving the report is approval of those actions (and since those actions do not require a formal resolution or motion by Council, at most all staff is obliged to do is keep Council informed). In such cases, if Council does not wish staff to carry out the actions outlined in the report, then that must be made clear (either by amending the report or by some other resolution of Council's intent).
If Council receives a report that recommends actions Council take, then receiving the report does NOT indicate that Council will take those actions, merely that staff is authorised to bring the appropriate reports, resolutions, or bylaws to Council for formal approval -- approval which Council may decline to give. Receiving the report does, in some sense, express a non-binding intention -- and also implicitly authorises staff to spend the time to prepare the material required for formal Council approval/action.
Hence the key distinction is whether the report being received outlines actions that staff could normally take without formal Council approval or actions that require formal Council motions. If the former -- then acceptance means approval. In the latter, acceptance merely signals intention but not approval or commitment.
So the key is knowing what actions in a report require a follow-up motion by Ccl.  You have to know the legislation. If the actions outlined in the report may be taken without a formal resolution of Council, then receiving the report is staff's carte blanche (but not obligation) to proceed. Which is the beauty of "receipt" -- if staff wishes to proceed, Ccl has been notified and staff is covered. If staff does not proceed, "receipt" conveys no requirement for action and staff is covered. Sweet. No surprise that staff have declined to put a definition of "receipt" into the Procedures Bylaw.

[NB: Once ccl begins debate after public has spoken, a resident is not allowed to speak; this means that although I expected clarification/answers to the issues I brought up, that didn't happen so this letter was sent as a followup since adoption is on the agenda Nov 26th.  Do hope these matters will be addressed at the Ccl mtg and before adoption]
An answer to this wd be appreciated -- do the workshops refer to all workshops, ie Managers' Workshops and will be open as well as allow residents to speak?
a)  The Mayor has referred to two business days.  Will the document have that revision, clarification?
b)  Will the Procedures still permit all of Council to agree to have a mtg without notice in a non-emergency?
c)  One reason given for two days is that letters come in late, but surely it's more important to have the major items and agenda earlier rather than hold them up for a few letters.  In any case, with Public Hearings, letters still come in late just before the mtg.  In fact, this item on the agenda had:
Additional Information:  Proposed Council Procedure Bylaw No. 4483, 2006 - Query re Section 4.16 (re timing of agenda availability) Additional Information item to be provided.
By reducing it from four to two days, does that mean this will no longer happen?
Cclr Smith also asked if the Procedures cd have putting the agenda on the DWV website.  Staff's answer was that they didn't want to jeopardize a Public Hearing in case the website was down and they didn't fulfill the requirements.
Of course a mbr is not allowed to speak once Ccl has commenced debate unfortunately, but there are at least three answers to that:
a)  the Procedures cd be worded as to 'best efforts' so on the rare occasion the website is down, it wd not trigger cancelling of a Public Hearing
b)  the Procedures (with respect to requiring notices to be placed on the website) cd be worded to apply to all except Public Hearings, for example.
a)  Will the Procedures be revised to permit the public to speak before and at the end of the mtg?
b)  Will accommodations be made so that there is time before the mtg is terminated for the public to speak (in other words, will public question period be called at 9:45 if the meeting is still in progress so that the public will be heard even if the vote to extend fails)?
Will a resident be permitted to correct any misrepresentation of his comments before the item is concluded?
Will there be PUBLIC Correspondence and letters as part of the ccl package have only the name and municipality/city/district noted?
Will draft transcripts of meetings -- the amount is petty cash/minimal at under $300 a month especially given the overruns in two depts referred to at the mtg were over half a million dollars -- be considered?  At least one councillor has commented on the helpfulness.
It is hoped these issues will be addressed before the new procedure bylaw is adopted and that more progress will be made toward welcoming and including the public and their participation in the District's affairs.
Carolanne Reynolds, Editor of West Van Matters

'Day of Empire' by AMY CHUA; reviewed by LANCE MORROW  
        Amy Chua claims empires share a surprising trait: tolerance.           
How to Rule the World -- review by LANCE MORROW; Published: November 18, 2007
The emperor Claudius thought about the dynamics of imperial ingestion. He reminded the Roman Senate that the founder Romulus would "both fight against and naturalize a people on the same day." Claudius argued that the Gauls, by logical extension, could be accepted into the Senate because "they no longer wear trousers" - that is, they could be counted on to come to work wearing the Roman toga and thus to have effectively become Romans.
DAY OF EMPIRE -- How Hyperpowers Rise to Global Dominance - and Why They Fall by Amy Chua; 396pp. Doubleday. $27.95.
The great Mughal emperor Akbar flourished by practising a similar "strategic tolerance" - which included what Amy Chua in "Day of Empire" calls "multicultural copulation". A Muslim himself, the emperor intermarried widely: "By the time of Akbar's death, he had more than 300 wives, including Rajputs, Afghans, princesses from South Indian kingdoms, Turks, Persians, and even two Christian women of Portuguese descent."
E pluribus unum.

===  CALENDAR to Dec 8th  === [M Hall unless otherwise noted; confirm b/c sometimes changes]
WEST VANCOUVER  Emergency Services Toy Drive  --  November 5th - December 15
Contact:  Const. Jeff Palmer, Community Services Unit (WVPD) - 925 7348; Assistant Fire Chief Martin Ernst (WVFD) - 925 7370
Enough stuffed toys already!!!
==  Thursday Nov 22nd ~ 7pm ~ Recreational Trail Users Mtg re Rodgers Crk Devt
==  Friday Nov 23rd ~ 9am ~ Arts & Culture WG at Cmnty Partners ofc, 1846 Marine, Lower Boardroom
~ 5pm ~  Celebrate 80th Anniversary of West Van Secondary: Student guides; cake-cutting; Kay Meek Theatre (RSVP to 925 9514 or 926 1947)
==  Tuesday Nov 27th    Rumours of Env'ment WG mtg (but not on DWV Cmnty Calendar)
        ~ 4:30pm ~ definitely a Finance & Audit Cmte mtg
==  Wednesday Nov 28th
        ~ 4pm ~ Police Bd mtg (moved from Nov 22) in Police Dept Boardroom
        ~ 4 - 7pm ~ WV Chamber of Commerce New Office Launch, WV Partners Ctr (1846 Marine); details in last issue; r.s.v.p. to: www.westvanchamber.com  or call (604) 926-6614
==  Thursday Nov 29th ~ 5pm ~ NSACDI at DNV M Hall

***   Parenting in a Cyber Age: Thurs Nov 29   ***
~ 7 - 9:30pm ~ The Centennial Theatre
The North Shore Family Court Youth Justice Committee is a federally and provincially mandated committee responsible to and funded by the three North Shore municipalities. The committee brings awareness to court related issues and acts as a bridge between communities and the justice system on behalf of families.  The NS Provincial Court is beginning to see the effects of the use/abuse of the Internet in particular with youth. In an effort to curb this trend, the Committee has initiated an educational evening for our community.
Join parents, secondary students, and community members to learn the good, the bad, and the ugly about social networking websites such as FACEBOOK, MYSPACE, and other popular web hangouts.
Join us to learn the tools you need to navigate this exciting, and sometimes dangerous, new world.
Keynote speaker Merlyn Horton  (Executive Director of Safe on Line Outreach Society - SOLOS)
will discuss how youth engage online, high risk activities, the dynamics of cyber bullying, and safety tips; and North Shore Secondary Students (presenting real time experiences on Facebook, YouTube, and MySpace)

==  Friday Nov 30th ~ 4:30pm ~ Heritage Strategic Plan Implementation WG
==  Monday Dec 3rd
~ 7pm ~ at SFU Harbour Ctr -- SFU's Urban Studies Program -
Public Forum: Dissenting from Highway Expansion: Reflecting on Citizen Activism at Eagleridge Bluffs
Free. Reservation required, email urban@sfu.ca or call 778 782 7914 for more info.
Panelists: Ned Jacobs, Betty Krawczyk, and Barbara Pettit / Moderator:  Frances Bula, Urban Issues Reporter, The Vancouver Sun.
==  Tuesday Dec 4th
        ~ 4:30pm ~ Festival of Lights -- Lighting Ceremony at Dundarave Beach
        ~ 5:30pm ~ RODGERS CREEK OPEN HOUSE; Hollyburn Club (950 Cross Crk); presentations at 7pm
        ~ 6:30pm ~ Cmnty Dialogue on Nbrhd Character & Housing WG
==  Wednesday Dec 5th
        ~ 10am ~ Cmnty Engagement Cmte
        ~ 7pm ~ Carol Ships and bonfires at Dundarave Beach
==  Thursday Dec 6th ~ 6pm ~ Rodgers Crk WG [NB: this will probably be postponed to Dec 13]
==  Saturday Dec 8th ~ 9am - 3pm ~ Cmnty Heritage Workshop at Srs' Ctr (ph 925 7056 to register)

+++ FERRY BUILDING GALLERY --  "Great Stuff"  -- Nov 30 - Dec 21
An exhibition and sale of unique crafts, fine artwork, and distinctive gifts at affordable prices from over 40 of the best artists and artisans, just in time for the Christmas shopper!
Special Gallery Hours: 10am - 6pm; Late Friday shopping until 8pm; Closed Mondays
Preview and Opening Sale on Friday, November 30 from 4 - 8 p.m.

+++  WV MEMORIAL LIBRARY +++ see www.westvanlib.ca for more!
Friday 23 ~~  Friday Night Concert Series Presents: Musica Intima
Free concert but seating is limited so come early and enjoy refreshments by Friends of the Library. Doors open at 7pm, concert starts at 7:30pm.
Thursday 29 ~~  Slide Show: Flights of Fantasy, 7:30pm  Photographer Damon Calderwood will discuss his incredible travels to capture the images of many of North America's most colourful birds.
Friday 30 ~~  Philosophers' Cafe: 10:30 - 12:30pm  Some say "the poor are always with us." But when are we with the poor? $5 admission, everyone welcome.
Thursday Dec 6 ~~  7:30pm ~ Author Visit - Theresa Kishkan
B.C. poet and author Theresa Kishkan will read from her latest collection of essays Phantom Limb.

+++  WV MUSEUM +++   BEHIND THE WIRE -- Nov 7 to Feb 9 
THE WARTIME DIARY AND ART OF ROBERT BUCKHAM. [Full description in previous issue of WVM]
Guest Speaker Series
= Tuesday 7pm November 27 at the WV Memorial Library (1950 Marine)
                Special guest: David Paperny, President, Paperny Films
Documentary Screening of Forced March to Freedom, Paperny Films, 2001
David Paperny's documentary film, "Forced March to Freedom", is based on a book of the same name written and illustrated by Robert Buckham. The film illustrates the experiences of Canadian air personnel imprisoned in German PoW camps during World War II. 
At the end of the Second World War, ten thousand prisoners of war anticipated liberation courtesy the advancing Russian Red Army. The retreating Germans forced the prisoners to march out of Stalag Luft III in the dead of winter toward the centre of a collapsing Third Reich in order to keep the PoWs as hostages. Forced March to Freedom tells the story of this amazing test of endurance through the eyes of Robert Buckham, a bomber pilot and artist who produced countless sketches and watercolours of prison camp life, as well as one of the only chronicles of the forced march itself. Interviews with Buckham and other PoWs accentuate the sketches of camp life and the march as well as the few actual photographs of the march known to exist. The film producer David Paperny gives you the inside account of making the documentary film.
=  Wednesday 7 - 8:30pm November 28
Guest speaker: Brian Seward, MMM.CD, Rtd., 6th Field Engineer Squadron, North Vancouver
Topic: Close to Home: Peacekeeping Missions Abroad
Brian L. Seward came to Canada after serving in the Royal Navy and Merchant Navy from 1944 to 1955. He joined the 6th Field Engineers Squadron in North Vancouver in 1962 as a Sapper and served 28 years in all ranks up to Sergeant-Major and Captain. He served in NATO (Germany) in 1972 and attended numerous joint exercises with the US 407th Engineers, building bridges, repairing roads, and removing explosives. Seward was awarded the Order of Military Merit for his dedicated and exceptional service by Governor General Edward Schreyer in Ottawa 1980.
=  Wednesday 7 - 8:30pm December 5
Guest speaker: Charles O. Lomudak, Settlement Worker, Vancouver School Board; Volunteer, UNICEF Canada
Topic: Born and Raised in War in Sudan
Since 1983, the ongoing civil war in Sudan [has] caused the death of nearly two million people-one in five of the southern Sudanese population. When the war broke out, Charles Lomudak was only ten years old. As the war intensified, homes were burned down, many Sudanese were repeatedly tortured, and thousands of boys were forced to become red army soldiers by the rebels. Lomudak and his family hid in bushes during the day, barely keeping themselves alive by eating wild plants and fruits, and traveled after dark moving away from the fighting. He spent several years in refugee camps in neighbouring countries, lost two brothers [owing] to the war and was recently reunited with his mother after 21 years of separation. In this talk, Lomudak gives his personal account of growing up in Sudan where he endured unimaginable brutality.

+++ Don't forget to check out www.silkpurse.ca and www.kaymeekcentre.com

============= = CCL NOTES Nov 19th  =================

1.                  CALL TO ORDER
2.                  PUBLIC HEARING
ZONING BYLAW NO. 2200, 1968, AMENDMENT BYLAW NO. 4530, 2007 (re Shell Gas Station, 1305 Marine Drive)
Applicant:  Pacific Land Group Inc. (Laura Jones spoke; will be a "Heritage Tree Sign")
Purpose: To re-develop the existing full service (gas and repair) station site at 1305 Marine Drive with a new "gas only" station, including a service at the pump component, and convenience store.
Proposed Zoning Bylaw Amendment:  To re-zone the site from Commercial Restricted Zone 2 (C.R.2, gas station with repair shop) to a new Commercial Restricted Zone 7 (C.R.7, gas station, including a service at the pump component, and convenience store).
Proposed Development Permit:  To regulate and impose conditions to preserve and enhance the area's main street character.  (New lampstandards and landscaping; cedar, real stone detailing)
Sop asked why no longer repairs, had been there for 40 years -- answer was small shops do that now
JC says always busy -- answer was maybe so but man wants to retire
JC how many now? (Ans 17) How many later? (12)
Mayor: if Ccl doesn't grant this zoning, what wd Shell's plans be?
Ans: have to go back and look at how much longer this will last.
        PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED; Bylaws ready Monday, so debate then.
1. APPROVAL OF Nov 19 AGENDA: add'l info for Item 7; other addns to Correspondence, add item 16.1 Capilano Suspension Bridge (CSB) Expansion into WV
2. ADOPTION OF Nov 5 MINUTES and Receipt of October 29, 2007 Council Workshop Minutes
3.         North Shore Service Club Committee for the Youth Safe House ... for receipt
Ezio Marzotto (sp?): Mbr of Rotary of Lions; Gate and tonight representing the NSh Service Club Cmte for reopening the NSh Youth Safe House.  Together: Four NSh Rotary Clubs, Seymour Lions Club, and the Soroptimists Int'l Club.  A bit of history.  Report in 2000 concluded a gap in NSh services and a refuge for youth needed.  Safe House opened Dec 2002, on NSh, no longer have to go to Vancouver; more than 1000 used it.  Sept 30 2006, House closed its doors, not b/c it did not serve the needs but b/c loss of continuity of funding support.  The adv cmte developed a new biz plan, and we (and other clubs) got together for a regional facility.  Many have come forward to make it possible to re-open the safe house.  [list on a slide]
An anonymous donor has made a contribution that will fund the first year, $385K.  House provided by DNV at $1 a year but needs renovations.
Someone from Hollyburn Family Services described rooms:  Upstairs emergency (14 days, hope to return to family), downstairs for teens not able to go home while they find somewhere for them to go.
EM: large number of ppl helped.  Labour, materials, completely renovated house.  Renos, about $80K. Some have given printers, cash donations, etc.  Ppl who want this house open have contributed in excess of $563,050.  Tremendous need.  Volunteer work groups; opening later this month.
Campaign for petition for long-term funding; more than 7,600 signed Oct 19th to 28th.  Last Friday MLA Whittred accepted the petition and will be presenting it to Legislature this week.
Request you lend us your considerable influence to urging prov/fed govts to taking leadership for long-term funding for this project.
Sop: govts have not stepped up to the plate
here we sit with no contribution whatsoever in these areas
responsible ppl we see you here in contrast to other side
know with report from Anne Mooi on Social Services (staff ) you'll see
JF: v v cmnty-minded groups; NSh Ms have been lobbying the prov govt, even had our MLAs do so but they've had little effect as well.
interesting we assume a wealthy cmnty such as ours no need; WV higher per capita taking advantage of this resource
need for this for our young ppl; through you thank you and all those who have come forth
Mayor: I'd like to thank you as well; the new and improved house; better footing.
4.         Update on the status of the North Shore Youth Safe House for homeless youth and activities undertaken by the District of West Vancouver during Homelessness Action Week, October 15 - 21, 2007 ... received for information.

5.         Child Care Services Working Group - Recommendations for Child Care Planning in West Vancouver
1.       The recommendations ... be received.
2.       Staff take action to:
a)  Work collaboratively with the WV School District to establish child care hubs in West Vancouver;
b)  Prepare a business plan by April 30th, to create child care hubs at the Gordon House facility and the Ambleside Adventure Playground site with third party licensed child care operators commencing September 2008;
c)   Pursue major capital funding opportunities for the creation of licensed child care space at the Gordon House facility and the Ambleside Adventure Playground site, with an estimated budget of $3000 from reserve funds for consultant fees to assist in preparation of applications;
d)  Support the School District in the development of a Community Child Care Hub adjacent to Eagle Harbour Primary School for March of 2008, including submitting an application to the Province for Capital funding;
e)  Host a Community Forum in early 2008 to seek further community input on zoning options for child care in single family residential and commercial zones as set out in section 3.2.4 of this report.
3.   Child care be included as a public amenity for consideration in new developments.
4.   Staff bring forward a Child Care Plan for West Vancouver with proposed priorities, timelines, and work program.
Mayor: V exciting report from WG.  Pls present to us, Anne Mooi--
Sop: on a point of information, if I may
on the report we received, just a moment ago, we received for information
Mayor: if you have a point of order, that wd be appropriate, otherwise I'd like to move through the agenda
Sop: it's a point of order
Mayor: what is the point of order?
Sop: the info piece we have coming before us now will ask to be received and has some recommendations; between being received and rec'd for info, when we receive something, what exactly does that mean?
Mayor: I'm not sure that's a point of order, but it is important that we know what we're doing
{titter of laughter}
CAO: no difference between received for information and received; indicates in a public venue that Ccl has received a report and all the information contained therein
gives Ccl opp to do a couple of things, perhaps raise issues contained in report; if wish to act, by way of resolution to take other action if they wish

{READ THIS CAREFULLY.  receipt has several and significant interpretations along with several cclrs viewing it differently.  Do you take this as approval of what's recommended in a report by receiving for information?  So that means amendments must be made at receipt if not wishing to vote against receipt???}

Sop: then why doesn't it state received for info, received for consideration, received in principle,--
Mayor: I know you have some concerns around this, I believe when we consider the Procedure Bylaw later in the evening wd be best to discuss this.  I'd like to get on with the presentation
Sop: think it's pertinent right now b/c the second half of this report wch I agree with 100% and like it, a lot of work has gone into it; second half requires some direction by staff wch in fact are going to be committed to a cmnty forum in 2008.  How can you put the cart before the horse?
if rec'd for information then it's a piece of information; what the staff recommendation is is that we are going to go through a long list of recommendations
Mayor: both are on the agenda.  First of all, let's have the report, then we can decide how to dispense with it.  In my view receipt means it now becomes property of Ccl and public -- staff and WG released it, now we can do what we like with it.  Miss Mooi--
Sop: that doesn't quite answer--
Mayor: I'm sorry--
Sop: Well I'm not getting an answer to my questions
Mayor: and I suggested that the place to do that is within the Procedure Bylaw
Sop: the point of order, Madam Mayor, is on this issue not on the other ones, so my--
Mayor: Cclr--
Sop: my point is, if we get a document--
Mayor: Cclr--
Sop: yeah--
Mayor:  I might have to rule you out of order if we cdn't pls get on with this, and if when we come to the motion for receipt if you'd like to further pursue this, that wd be appropriate
Sop, talking while Mayor is and then I caught: I just wondered why I can't ask, be given a simple answer to a concern of mine, that's all
Mayor: well, we've been receiving reports for three years, or more in your case.  Ms Mooi--
Sop: Well, you don't have to be that way.  I'm just asking some simple questions, for goodness's sake.
Mayor to Ms Mooi: --Welcome--
{Where's King Juan Carlos???}
Sop:  I like to know what's going on for information.
Mayor: Cclr Soprovich.  Child Care Services WG.
Anne Mooi (staff), who has been smiling patiently:  Good evening, Madam Mayor. WG established last March finish March 2008 [introduced mbrs of WG present at this mtg]
Denise Byotte (sp?): [slides]  true mark is how a society treats its children
This represents an updated examination of the needs of NSh parents and child care providers
[reports 1990 - 1995]
Four Parts of the Assessment: parental assessment, childcare providers, best practices/policies, recommendations
o  377 parents completed surveys, of wch 62 from WV; 52% impacts (cuts from fed/prov funding) with higher fees and waitlist; none recommended pay cut for providers; family planning -- can't afford another child, eg two chn under three looking at $2500 a month; barriers to returning to work; childcare on NSh but more needed; quality; childcare fees struggle to budget;
o  255 childcare facilities on NSh, 53 in WV; 23% return rate of surveys; facilities in need of upgrade; recruitment and retention of staff, salaries low so hard to live in Lower Mainland and work here; dip in ppl wanting to go into field and then for a while and go to another field; enrolment variations; preschools work if you can get child there and back b/c limited hours of operation and no childcare provision; NSh Resource Society help critical.
o  Recommendations: continue to advocate support, move toward hub model.
the hub model is being used across country; divide into regions -- some areas more young chn than others; cmnty involvement key; ease the navigation; work with Sch Dists to incorporate childcare into schools (being done in Manitoba); opps to establish and expand; volunteer peer review to monitor; leverage cmnty expertise, increase public awareness, raise status of child care providers; develop M policies; increase number of graduates in childcare at Cap College; ongoing prof devt opps.
Anne Mooi: wd like to specifically thank Cclr Smith whose commitment and leadership has been outstanding
Joanne McKenna: eight months ago sat here and talked about a crisis specifically about the closing of the Cedardale, impressed with how quickly M moved to address this
we weren't able to find an alternative to the Cedardale Learning Ctr, we have found
our mandate was quite broad; consider zoning, M space, childcare space a cmnty benefit; child care progs; Cedardale alternative
NSh Needs Assessment June 2007 and cmnty expertise: WG mbrs and subgroups
broad perspectives; challenged all of us
hosted a child care providers forum in June -- unbelievable, first time they'd been asked for their perspective!  proved invaluable
shortage of facilities and shortage of trained providers -- UBC is holding a session tonight about attracting ppl into that area
lack of recognition, poor compensation; not one specific level of govt; fed cuts, prov flipflops
greater work needed for cooperation and coordination
Looked at zoning bylaw changes: draft proposals wrt changes; good nbrhd policy, look at on case-by-case basis
Child Care Hubs: not often near a school; need collaboration, poised to advance this
three potential sites: Gordon House; Eagle Harbour Primary School Site (adjacent to school bldg); Ambleside Adventure Playground site
Including childcare facilities as a public benefit: have in Amb Town Strategy, Rodgers, and $2.5M from Ev Dr
Federal cutbacks; pursue capital funding from prov; lobby province
Alternate location for Cedardale Learning Ctr
216 group daycare spaces, down 32 to 174 with closing Cedardale; another needs to move, taking spaces down 2300 aged zero to five; sadly lacking % working mothers 85% working fathers
MOVING FORWARD: urge you to adopt and embrace wholeheartedly; look forward to working productively
Do want to say thank you to WG and to Ccl; using cmnty; tremendous opp, to walk the talk
incredibly impressed with professionalism and knowledge of mbrs, in particular Cclr Smith who I dont think missed a mtg
....come up with a creative solution
Mayor: thank you and thank you for your leadership as well
MS: great pleasure; small change, wd like to take d) out; opp to capture some prov funding at Eagle Hbr hub and will make that no 5
[read out above recommendations with No 5 added]
exhausted reading that out; a pleasure and privilege; everyone's opinion heard and respected
early age children have flown under the radar screen; parents working so not much time for lobbying; time now that we do step up value and respect chn in cmnty, work with Sch Dist to make sure adequate spaces; enthusiastically endorse the recommendations of the WG, hope Ccl will; hope it will lead to a more lively number of facilities for chn
JF: I too will be supporting the policies; wd like to thank all the mbrs of the WG; presentation thorough, succinct, easily understandable; job well done
extremely imp Ccl support this
we know there's a prob with enabling families with young chn to live in WV
help, relieve stresses last few years; some funding
timing everything; survey, Cedardale closing, knew getting results back; right time, galvanized Ccl, Sch Dist, and Parents at right time; looking forward to seeing this continue
VV: good to use this as an example to illustrate Cclr Sop's point and mine: asked to receive; v good piece of work, v substantial, wd be inclined simply to receive it
when I previously enquired as to what that means, if there's anything at all in the report that I disagree with I shd not receive it
example I see recommended amendment to residential sgl-fam zoning to allow up to 16 chn on lots a min size of 10Ksf; there's more along those lines; at this juncture I can't agree with all of that
am I correctly interpreting this I then shd vote not to receive this report, is my understanding correct?
Mayor: will ask Mr Stuart but motion can vote for or against parts
CAO: opp in this case to identify areas opposed and don't want staff to continue
much of this requires more work before coming back to Ccl for final consideration
zoning is a good example -- wd accept and sometimes certain mbrs of Ccl wd not
Ccl cannot vote on zoning issues with this but if a ccl mbr felt it impossible to rezone for child care, can vote against and note why
if you go further, there are recommendations to advance; there is one wrt zoning
cd receive report but not the part about zoning
vote not to receive report or not support zoning
VV: not able to support without further discussion
it will be with regret I won't be able to vote to receive it
SJN: rec is to consult with cmnty wrt zoning; basically if you do not wish to consult with cmnty you'd vote against
RD: same; item E, consult with cmnty not talking about changing zoning
I strongly support these changes, our duty to support our chn, our future, make life as easy as we can
In France, Sweden, and elsewhere, public education starts at three, considerable $$$ for creche.
Daycare mostly provided by State; feel strongly b/c I lived in France for a number of years
Shd have it in Canada
thank this WG for all the good work it's done
Sop: my congratulations go out to this WG; first one that's come to Ccl
lack of space, creation of care for our chn; I went to some of the mtgs; some did not want to create larger daycares; wanted eight and under, all they cd handle; wdn't look at commercial space b/c too expensive; hubs good, and schools; wrt zoning, some statements without consulting with public but when go through process
I apologize, I didn't mean to be rude to you; if we receive, receive with great thanks, and what we do is our business
the zoning portion is equally important as the rest of what we're trying to achieve here
diff than recommendations
support group
as with Cclr V, receive for information; other for info; why this difference?
Mayor: Mr Stuart, a third time
CAO: pp 94 to 97, detail, sophisticated discussions wrt zoning
think this is just the basis; look at all the issues; I wdn't suggest Ccl accepting all the recs, talking, forms basis of what will work and what won't; basis to come back to Ccl
JC: echo, congratulations; work, and quality; any zoning requires a public hearing and a public mtg
in my mind to not support wd be throwing a wonderful opp straight into the trash barrel; fully in support of this, receive or not receive!
MS: don't know why we can't just use logic in these ccl mtgs
if you receive a report, you receive a report; if you take action on the report, that's a separate motion

{NOT NECESSARILY -- wch is the problem -- even though one can see that's how presented in this case.  Some reports contain action items for staff, not just principles/policies for Ccl agreement.}

so we're receiving the report that's being presented to us
Then there's a second motion, these are the action items that will come out of the report
as Cclr Clark and Day said, I don't recall saying we're recommending rezoning anything -- all we're saying a, b, c, d, there were four, and I added a fifth; those were the action items
if ppl don't understand what receiving a report and taking action was, then we've got a real problem going forward as a Ccl
to summarize, b/c of work involved and recommendations I don't see how anybody cd oppose the four or five recommendations/actions/items I read out; that we get the unanimous support on Ccl b/c I think it's important and move on
RD: to receive is simply to receive for further consideration, it does not oblige you or Ccl to agree to ev part of the motion; in fact in receiving you can distance yourself to two parts as two of our colleagues have done
so it's just to receive for further consideration, we have to understand that otherwise quibbling forever over every little detail
no diff really between receiving and receiving for further information; it's a nuance, and sort of thing we don't really need to debate, we can leave that to staff as to whether to receive or receive for further information, pretty much the same thing
{not really -- see other interpretations}
Mayor: like to wrap up; receipt is an indication of our thanks for this outstanding piece of policy, cd not have done it without you
took a crisis and turned it into an opportunity and hope; encouraging to be working so collaboratively with the School Dist; pioneered, reaching out to child care providers, inviting them to M Hall
Cclr Smith, your leadership has been outstanding -- it's been a trial to put ccls out as leaders, and that has worked very well
when the prov govt comes forward with a new funding formula wch is the case right now, we need to be ready and we are ready and those cmnties that are not won't get
this is exciting; can't imagine not supporting a further public process around what will be most sensitive, and that is child care in residential nbrhds -- everybody knows if we are mandated eight chn or fewer anywhere in province.  Question is, can we do better, and how can we be sensitive to nbrhds.  So it's a v proud day for this Ccl and we thank you.
what has motivated us, is looking after our chn, and that's where you see everybody pulling together.
Mayor: ask Ccl, prefer vote as whole or indiv?  whole?
Sop: individually
Mayor (looking around): okay, as a whole?
[PASSES with VV opposed]
{When is RECEIPT information and when approval?  See Updates at beginning}

6.         Development Variance Permit Application No. 07-037 (866 20th Street)
Additional Correspondence:  3 letters from the residents of 918 20th Street, 951 20th Street, and 1952 Gordon Avenue (previously received at the November 5, 2007 Council Meeting)
At the November 05, 2007 meeting, Council received the report dated October 23, 2007 from the Community Planner.
MOTION: the DVP which would allow for the retention of an existing non-conforming driveway location be approved.
Geoff/Jeff Keate (sp?): hired to design a new home for my clients; they are here this evening
DVP to allow retention of existing driveway; original house was built 70 years ago
proposed house wd retain the driveway [slide of architectural drawing; house had received approval some years ago but those owners didn't go through with it]
All 13 lots have driveway access from 20th and without approval tonight wd be only one without
[slide of footprint, showing three large cedars wch wd hv to be removed to put garage there and nbrs concerned about losing those trees as well]
Nbr has gone to 17 nbrs, all support existing driveway; Planning also supports
RD: I went to the site this afternoon and it's been cleared
Ans: yes last week; in June told didn't a Variance and then told did need one; been putting off contractor and ..... so cdn't keep them waiting
RD: those large trees? were those the cedars? have they been cut
Louise: the tree that was felled was on the south side of prop, had lost top, had split and was told not stable
RD: just one tree?  those in back there? cdn't tell b/c getting dark; still there?
Louise: yes; in mid-Sept sewer line collapsed so had to get out, three chn; b/c needed a variance with collapse had to get out, stay with friends, house sitting empty, derelict since that time
RD: since mid Sept?
Louise: yes;.... we walk a lot in this nbrhd, kids go to PJ; live in front of house, if back changes
wd change the way we live in house; no parking on 20th; guests will be parking on street wch is why want driveways at back; guest parking on 20th and narrowing it wd make it worse -- a lot of ppl walk down our street
Mayor: correspondence we
SSch: 918 20th Correspondence
Mayor: no further public input, Cclr Day make recommendation
RD: moved receipt (CARRIED), then approval (ALSO CARRIED)

7.         Council Procedure Bylaw No. 4483, 2006 (Revised)
Additional Information:  Proposed Council Procedure Bylaw No. 4483, 2006 - Query re Section 4.16 (re timing of agenda availability) Additional Information item to be provided.
Mayor: Ms Reynolds to speak
Carolanne Reynolds, Editor WVM:  Wow! 130 pages!
Cclr Vaughan said she had a couple of amendments and Cclr Soprovich has 14.  I have fewer.
May I please ask for clarification as well.
It's good to note that Council Workshops will be open but does that include Managers' workshops to wch all Ccl is invited?  IOW are they both open and are the public entitled to speak?
In one place it says the agenda/mtg information will be available four days in advance and the revision as I read it says two.  That cd mean Saturday!  May I suggest instead, three business days before the Ccl mtg.
In fact, in one place my reading is that Ccl can call a mtg without any notice whatsoever (page 86). While one might imagine an emergency situation that requires notice to be waived, this section imposes no requirement that an emergency be declared or imminent. Merely to permit all of Council to agree to having waived notice is neither acceptable nor necessary.
After when, where.  It is my hope that the District will hasten its emergence from the Middle Ages.  Yes, I'm speaking again about the notice of meetings.  It just states the agenda is to be posted outside the north and south doors of municipal hall.  Why expect residents to have to walk to the Hall?  Please specify that the agenda be on the District's website three business days before the mtg.  Sometimes there are major issues and that is not much time.
Also, the Communications Dept has an excellent system for press and media releases.  Please expand this so that citizens can sign up to be on the email notice of the agenda.  It's just the press of a button to go to the list.  This can apply to cmte mtgs.
Close of mtg.  If Ccl decides to insist on a unanimous vote to go past 10pm, then may I suggest the system the last Ccl had, that is that at 9:45 Mayor Wood wd ask if anyone from the public wanted to speak.  In fact may I also suggest that after the call to order at 7pm there be a five-minute period for anyone in the gallery who has an urgent question or a question about something not on the agenda.  Ccl can answer immediately or defer to staff or to the end of the mtg as appropriate.  Requiring citizens to wait two to three hours just to ask a simple question would appear to be placing unnecessary obstacles in the way of community participation, and indeed some municipalities allow public question between 6:30 and 7pm.  [IOW, ensure time for public to speak.]
p77, 4.50 (c) ii allows a ccl mbr to speak a third time if needed to further explain a point or has been misunderstood.  Residents speak once and then are not allowed to speak after Ccl has started debate.  May I recommend that this opportunity be afforded a resident in the unusual case of his point being misunderstood, misquoted, or misrepresented during Ccl's discussion of his point raised.  This cd be done as a Point of Order or whatever.
Public Correspondence ought to be clarified.  [IOW letters to M&Ccl be in pkg with name and jurisdiction, not for Ccl eyes only or with name and whether or not WV resident deleted.]
With the minutes of ccl mtgs mere motions, and comments either not recorded or limited to "discussion ensued", please consider an unofficial transcript (we estimate the cost as $25 a recorded hour, wch wd be $75 a ccl mtg, roughly $300 a month, maybe less b/c sometimes mtgs shorter and holidays, a very small amount for such a major source of information and record of ccl proceedings).
[Some months ago we found a company who gave that figure and I reported that at a ccl mtg (in WVM).]
Thank you
Mayor: Thank you.  Three minutes.  Cclr F, motion
JF: move second reading
Mayor: move receipt; then discussion at second reading)
JF: sorry on wrong page, move the Additional Information Report dated November 2, 2007 from the Municipal Clerk re Proposed Council Procedure Bylaw No. 4483, 2006 - Query re Section 4.16 be received for information.
JF:  move [revised] Ccl Procedures read a second time, as amended.
Sop: had a number of thoughts, going through answered all but one
some things that might not qualify
that we put 'receiving' clarify 'receiving for information' and 'receive for clarification'.
so no second interpretation
CAO: we have a policy wrt report recommendation; can easily  amend that to make it v clear, not nec to put in the bylaw; to change bylaw it has to be advertised
amend wrt report/policy preparation, cd do that for next week (Monday)

{EXHIBIT A.  In this case even passing a bylaw (more than receipt) that has Schedules appended and then the Schedules can be changed without reference to the bylaw???  One may agree with this 'flexibility' but critical to understand the rules of play.}

VV: wd like 4.16 wch says Clerk make agenda av to mbr of Ccl and public amended from two days prior, to five days prior to the next mtg
rationale if we're continually deferring something, public come then find they have to come back
in democracy wd like to put public first, ourselves second in consideration, and regrettably staff work around that as best they can
Part B: b/c this bylaw has a section specifically entitled definitions -- refers also to Schedule A
has motion says 'to receive a report', definition and show examples public wd be well served
have expressions and definition under 1.4; then public don't have to follow up and discover you also have to have a policy document to approve, approve in principle, receive, receive for consideration
believe more useful to the public and more complete and coherent if we add those definitions in 1.4 and show examples in Sch A alongside this No 3 motion to receive a report
wrap it up nicely, if notices; do that now; save us from going back to other processes, and once and for all we'll have a reference point for what we mean by what we say
illuminating to hear Cclrs Smith and Day repeating a definition to receive different from what the CAO said earlier so we really need this tied down.
Mayor: that's not an amendment to the motion, that's an amendment to the actual Ccl Procedures bylaw; I'll ask Mr Stuart if we can entertain that or if it needs renotification
CAO: I don't think definition, what Cclrs Day and Clark cited, is anything different from what I cited, want to make that clear
RD: I'll second that; I thought I was agreeing with Mr Stuart. Perhaps ask Clerk if substantive enough to need advertising, to start process again
MClk, SSch: don't believe so [cited process/notification/advertising]
Mayor: so address the way any amendment, whether 4.16 two or five days prior
JF: motion t amend but it hasn't been seconded
Sop: for discussion I'll second
RB, DoAS: to clarify, this was discussed some time ago, moving from four to two days was done to assist Ccl, in that correspondence received from the general public is made av to Ccl in advance of the mtg, b/c as on the agenda on this evening there's Devt Permits and Rezonings.  If you have five clear biz days that means seven almost eight days prior to the mtg, there's an awful lot of correspondence that wd arrive that Ccl wd get at the last minute and wd not be published on website if that period extended
We receive v few, and certainly the MClk can comment on this, as far as any concerns from the general public, on the current timeframe for preparing agendas for the general public
this is the v reason to assist Ccl and general public, the closeness of agenda pubn as close as we cd, within two biz days of actual ccl mtg
Mayor: obviate what was happening wch was more reports being supplied on the Friday b/c not av in time, and then a further third set of things on table on the Monday

{what makes anyone think they'll stick to two biz days before? if they cdn't before?
And note, I say biz days b/c doc only said two days -- hence the reference to calendar days -- but now it seems they're saying biz days too; assume change will be made to document?}

wch really did serve to compromise public's ability to inform itself
we're trying to be much more disciplined, have one set two biz days prior
anyone else wanting to discuss 4.16
JF: can appreciate seeing the public have the opp to deal with Ccl issues; but not in best interests to have the agenda out five days ahead of time; worked with agendas five days out ahead and having been in receipt ten minutes before, with add'l staff reports, I think not in interests of public or M to make decisions on (cclrs not as well-briefed); I'm not in favour
Sop: seems reasonable to assume we can digest a stack of information, reports, that might be as tonight, a lot of them; two days prior to a mtg?
if we look at the difficulties staff has, particularly MClk has to supply us with all this inf
take as in early years, five days, then shortened it, wonder if compromise three days
CAO: not two days, it's two biz days; previous dealt with calendar days so saying four meant two biz days
Mayor: part of our job is to help support our staff be efficient with our agendas; ask Ms Scholes

{hm.  what about Cclr V's point of serving public first?  Ccl second? staff third to meet requirements?}

MClk: change to two biz days was much discussed; directly to volume of supplemental packages and on-table packages, resulted in a number of ccl mtgs having three packages for Ccl to review.
Sop: if we receive one day earlier, Thursday, that's two days, so Wed, Th, Fri
MClk: currently published Thursday, and that's two biz days prior, so three days wd take it back to Wed
{some mumblings}
Sop: something that cd be accepted; too difficult; ask Madam Clerk if
Mayor: recommendation before us is two biz days
CAO: if item Monday night and we have to turn it around and have it on agenda for Wed, it's impossible to do that
RD: think works pretty well the system we have...
little happier if we got our papers, our agenda, middle of the day on Thursday, rather than end of day
be more convenient if cut off mid-day
frequently late on Thurs so on Friday we have to work on it then and over weekend, public in similar situation, more convenient if cutoff mid day
v hard, Thursday deadline difficult; my wish just set deadline midday; no panic Thurs afternoon, no criticism at all of MClk
VV: wrt turnaround time; the George Cuff report suggested not having ccl mtgs on consecutive Mondays exactly b/c of turn around time, so if we did that in conjunction that wd do quite well
Ccl mtgs ev second mtg and more toward electronic transmission
if ev second Monday shd be possible
Mayor: we are looking toward two ccl mtgs and a workshop a month
reduce photocopying; so much in this Procedure bylaw, worked on this for two years to streamline and boil down; maybe just pass it and work with it
All in favour of agenda being made av five days prior?
so we'll go with recommendation
CAO: this is a constantly evolving doc; it's not a doc that we can't revise; can look at it again in a few months; if other changes can bring those forward
MS: I think Ms Reynolds makes a pretty solid point; in today's world shdn't have to ride their horse and buggy down to town hall, publish the agenda on the Web so can see two days prior to the mtg
Mayor: I think it's there
MClk: posted to website on Thurs afternoons
in one of the prev bylaw revisions we considered including that but having frequent technical difficulties at that time, did not want to have it included in the bylaw and not be able to meet that deadline and be contrary to our bylaw
Mayor: but question wrt notification of mtgs on front door, how cd that be readily av on website front page?
MClk: can contact our Communications Mgr and see if can put link from home page to that
RB: certainly can enhance; if public in need of add'l advertising; as pointed out by the Clk, it was our legal advisers that recommended not to include electronic in procedure bylaw so if technical difficulty, mtg cdn't be challenged; as far as [website] and at Library have been doing that
Mayor: that's our intent
[CARRIES with VV opposed]
Mayor: living document, look forward to refining as we go along.
JF: finally ... move read a third time.

8.         Mid-Year Review and [Five-]Year Financial Plan Bylaw No. 4510, 2007, Amendment Bylaw No. 4529, 2007
RECOMMENDED: THAT Council receive the report ... for information.
RECOMMENDED: THAT ... be introduced and read a first and second time.
RECOMMENDED: THAT third reading ... be deferred until the November 26, 2007 meeting of Council, in order to allow for a period of resident comment on the contents of the bylaw.
RL: recommends amendment based on operations; review to June 30th; comparison of last four years; focus on work programs; projections and budget variances
Ccl been made aware last July of ongoing financial challenges in particular Police and Fire; led us to look at projections and possible budget variances
Ccl aware of more significant financial challenges under review and you have provided direction to staff reflected in bylaw before you

It's transparent the more than million-dollar overrun has been kept from public knowledge for four months!
We're to be grateful not informed Dec 18 for public input.......}

resources from surplus: items discussed in review
o   Police Expenditures over $666,000 largely due to one-time legal, severance, and recruiting costs
this amount will be offset by add'l revenue-sharing grant from prov traffic fines of some $82,800K
this results in projected net over-expenditure $583,400
o   Secondly Fire, expected to exceed existing budget of $504,700 wch will be offset by add'l revenues of some $18K for a net projected expenditure of $486,700 and increased sick and overtime costs are the main causes
o   The one-time clean up and recovery costs related to storm events last Jan
will exceed prov emergency program recovery by almost $228K
$70,400K absorbed by existing Parks budget, and remaining $177,600 will exceed available Public Works budget
o   Parks and Cmnty Services revenues will be short by $40K, late decision not to have user fees, certain sports fields
Mitigating, due to increased bldg activity, inspection revenue to exceed $526,500
=  net impact, requires $741,200 transfer from surplus
staff suggest first reading this time to allow for public comment before second and third
JC: read a first time
second and third be deferred to Nov 26
CAO: to make Ccl aware both the Police Chief and Fire Chief will be at that next mtg to answer any questions

{but ONE WEEK to have speak with Dept Heads wrt their budgets that together have gone over by more than a million dollars??? 
and the Police Chief was not involved in the decision that caused the overrun -- why not have Police Board there to answer instead of having someone who wasn't even in WV?
how many residents will know about the need to cover deficits and how Ccl has decided to do so?
If Ccl found out in July, why not give the public time to suggest how to deal with it rather than have it made public with recommendations four months later, then leaving one week for public to find out and comment???
My guess: fewer than 1% of WV residents will know about this.
They may wake up when they see the hike in the tax rate increase............}

[JC made motions, Mayor reminded him just first reading]
Sop: wondering, how we can absolve debt this by requiring being paid out of surplus
Mayor: what we're shooting for here is to discuss next week, that way the public can become aware of this extraordinary situation
{assuming we'll be grateful for small, v small, mercies}
we'll have opp as Mr Stuart said for the executive to comment
is your question about source of funding? then v useful to have those questions on floor this evening so we can prepare answers
Sop: just says the net impact is that it requires a transfer from surplus
these are budgetary items and we have to find ourselves with a balanced budget
do we just arbitrarily take it out of surplus to meet the demands
where are the efficiencies?
where is the responsibility of the depts to find those efficiencies?  so taxpayer doesn't face that added burden

{exactly, Sop!}

this is a document, Mr Laing, midyear result states we are in $1M in excess
{he means over budget}
Mayor: $741K
CAO: part of normal budgeting practices, at midyear review assume Dept will absorb any special costs; see Parks absorbed $70K of storm costs; that happens throughout the organization where we have v special circumstances, whether wind storms or the other legal matters associated with the Police, the impact on services wd be significant, and in Staff's opinion, it wd be inappropriate to cut that dept's budget and impact the services so significantly and therefore we wd recommend to Ccl, in fact, that we do the exact thing we're recommending this evening, wch is transfer funds from our reserves.  This hasn't been done v often and certainly, Ccl will agree wrt the three most significant issues, the wind storm, the Police overage, and the Fire overage, that these are exceptional circumstances.  Our goal is to ensure they are not repeated
VV: interesting point about the Police overage; we need to look at that separately; a different kind of obligation
factors lead me to believe we are not in a position to transfer from surplus to meet the approximately half million dollars of overage that largely came from, described here, legal costs, severance, and recruitment connected with the prev police chief's departure
when I think about that, the Police Bd  made that decision, they're legally empowered to do that, and ppl believe they made it in good faith and good conscience, but nevertheless the Ccl was not approached and asked for its concurrence wrt--
Mayor: excuse me, that's not the case at all; that was discussed in camera on numerous occasions--
VV: if I might finish my sentence, in advance of initiating that action and we have here a simple statement in the introduction wch says that depts are expected to absorb unusual and unforeseen items, and to repriorize work programs to fit existing budgets by year end.  Now that wd apply in this case.  I don't think we actually have the right as a Ccl to use our taxpayers' money to pick up the tab for actions that we cdn't scrutinize b/c the decisions made by the Police Bd wrt staffing wd be made in camera and legally we're not a part of that.  So I don't see how we can recommend the spending of approximately half a million dollars of our taxpayers' money for matters not decided by us, not approved in advance by us, and that we cannot scrutinize the details of.  So I truly believe that this particular case is something the Police Bd shd solve according to the stated policy wch is to repriorize work programs to fit within existing budgets.   I think that's an important point b/c the Police Bd is a legally constituted body, but it's not an elected body; we're an elected body and we don't accept bills from unelected bodies for actions we did not give prior consent to.
so having said that, hope others will consider these aspects.

{Well said.  Readers -- have your say next week!  Are they truly autonomous?  are they accountable?  do they accept the consequences of their decisions?}

Mayor: motion on floor is second and third reading and having this entire debate next Monday.  That shd be the substance of the debate, precisely b/c Pl Chief not av tonight and precisely b/c Ccl may need information about the obligations of the Police Bd and how the Police Act works and our connection to it wrt funding
RL: want to clarify; in the report, both the language and the intention; in normal circumstances it is expected the division will absorb ongoing overs and unders; only in exceptional or unusual cases, wd it come forward to Ccl for add'l resources.  We have done that in past, we don't do it lightly; believe listed in report, these are unusual and not under normal operation
Mayor: this debate will be next Monday night, absolutely


9.         Animal Control and Licence Bylaw No. 4208, 2000, Amendment Bylaw No. 4531, 2007 - Dangerous Dogs
RECOMMENDED: ... be read a first, second and third time. [Three readings passed; no discussion]
10.       Fees and Charges Bylaw No. 4414, 2005, Amendment Bylaw No. 4532, 2007 - Business Licence Fees
1.      ... read a first, second and third time.
2.      ... posted and advertised in accordance with the Community Charter.
3.      Following statutory notification, the bylaw be scheduled for Council's consideration at the December 3, 2007 regular Council meeting.

11.       Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 4360, 2004, Amendment Bylaw No. 4534, 2007, Zoning Bylaw No. 2200, 1968, Amendment Bylaw No. 4533, 2007 and Development Permit 07-015 for 2396/2388 Marine Drive
RECOMMENDED: THAT the opportunities provided for consultation on a proposed Official Community Plan amendment to re-develop 2396 and 2388 Marine Drive, as outlined in the November 9, 2007 report from the Community Planner, be endorsed as sufficient consultation for the purposes of Section 879 of the Local Government Act.

{IS THIS A PRECEDENT?  enough time for the public to explore various possibilities, not just what is presented?  Then, if the increased density agreed to, enough time for the public to express views on what cmnty benefits and amenities they wish in exchange for granting the higher value.}
RECOMMENDED:THAT the OCP Amendment ... be now introduced and read a first time in short form.
RECOMMENDED: THAT the OCP Amendment ... has been considered in conjunction with the District's most recent financial plan and the regional waste management plan.

{recommended it has been considered? don't understand}

Karl Gustavson, architect: model in lobby; asking for referral to PH
has been through a lot of public discussion; started as Capers and said not acceptable
Client Larry Sutherland and xxxx as well
proposal for 20 residential, no commercial; came to Ccl with that proposal said too large for site
more public consultation; looked at consolidation of that site -- looked at combined 17000sf down to 16K+ sf and to that now
reduced ht of bldg to two storeys; odd situation, little to no impact; 15 units
{from commercial to 15 units has little or no impact???}
little impact to nbr to east, mitigated impact to south; angled parking
C1 zoning; this provides [fewer] car trips; deterring traffic from going east down lane, user-friendly
took all parking on grade put underground
many features good for cmnty: sustainability, aging in place, variety in size, increased pedestrian facilities; sidewalk, bus shelter; services required already in place
large public consultation, well-attended

{perhaps misleading; the mtgs were with residents in the nbrhd, ie not 'public' as in wide consultation as one might surmise.}

some letters wrt tree ht and traffic during construction
one thought or comment -- read recommendation from Design Review
Mayor: any questions?
VV: I'm opposed to this proceeding further; don't see it in compliance with OCP at all, policy H3 wch staff rightly points out; devt wd hv to be separated by greenbelt, road, or....
but it's duplex, not sgl-fam, so are we considering ppl in duplexes second-class citizens? shd accord them same considerations
so OCP not complied with and H5, specifically refers to commercial ctr, it's not in Dundarave ctr, it's flanking; can't proceed; really shd wait until the next Ccl reviews the OCP
putting a lot of time and effort into something we can't support
Mayor: motion on floor is process
JF: I'm sure Cclr V understands what we're doing is amending OCP so can be sure it complies
VV: prob with OCP: can amend under certain conditions, but this is an attempt to instigate spotzoning
point of OCP was peace of mind so not subject to spotzoning wrt something next to them; perhaps misunderstanding OCP
what OCP is all about, exactly so we don't misinterpret
Mayor: important to stay with motion on the floor; know Ccl has strong feelings on this proposal, but first whether PH before discussing merits of proposal
JF: want to assure Cclr V that I have a v clear idea of the OCP
JC moves: Zoning Amendment Bylaw ... be now introduced and read a first time in short form.
JC then moves: ... all dealing with the re-development of 2396 and 2388 Marine Drive be considered at a concurrent Public Hearing / Public Meeting to be held on Monday, December 10, 2007
MS: I don't have any objection to this going out to Public Hearing.  My only question or concern is Ccl policy wrt Cmnty Benefits.  I wd think mbrs of the public wd quite properly ask how we arrived at the cmnty benefit, and I think if we're going to a PH, we shd come with at least how and why we came up with that figure, and how and why it's going to be applied, and so that, we sort of struggle for some consistent Cmnty Benefit and Public Amenity policy, when looking at these rezoning applications
SJN: I have a draft report on that and will provide that to Ccl prior to the PH.  We do not believe in this particular instance there's basically any uplift in the property; it's a lateral zoning change with different types of use, but we'll provide info on that and also an est of costs and benefits that hv bn included so you have that before you
Mayor: as well as what's contained in the report before us

{No uplift?  Seriously?  I know it too, seven years for me to get DWV to admit there was increased value of property when upzoning but this is incredible.  It was zoned Commercial.  Residential is more lucrative/profitable than commercial (finger on motivation).  This lot is next to duplex-zoned lots -- so does that mean about four units b/c two lots?  And this zoning is for 15 units.  Ask any realtor if he thinks that's 'lateral', about the same value/appraisal.  Then let me know.  Also keep in mind that if increased value, the cmnty ought to get some benefit/amenities for that.  Rule of thumb is two-thirds to 75%, but owners love the thought of not having to provide anything, eats into the profits, doncha know.}

12.       Zoning Intent - Consistency of Regulations
RECOMMENDED: THAT the November 9, 2007 report of the Director of Planning, Lands and Permits regarding "Zoning Intent - Consistency of Regulations" be received.
Carolanne Reynolds, also involved with Dundarave Nbrhd Assn (DNA) wch brought this matter to Ccl (Sept 17 ccl mtg) and urged that regulations be interpreted according with intent b/c of some perceived anomalies:
Editor of West Van Matters.  As you know, Mayor Goldsmith-Jones, I was in the gallery when this matter was brought up and by the DNA with the example on Ottawa that they were talking about.  I have two points.  One is that Mr Gibbs, who spearheaded this, and his wife are in Buenos Aires right now.  I have a letter from him but I will defer to Cclr Soprovich b/c he, I'm sure he'll [deal with that] b/c email has been sent to him; not sure if he's received it.  If Cclr Soprovich has received it, I'll leave that to him and then I have one comment
Mayor: then I'll have your comment pls
CR: If Cclr Soprovich hasn't got it, I will comment; if he has
Sop: I know of the document you're talking about; I don't have it in front of me
CR: I can give it to you
Mayor: we're down to two minute now; we've still got a heavy agenda
CR: in the memo from Mr Nicholls, wch is v good and give background and I understand this is going to be looked at again, there was one sentence that stood out, and I will read it:
"If covered decks were included in the FAR, it wd discourage or prevent some of the best parts of traditional West Vancouver architecture and encourage square box design."
IMO, it is quite obvious that architects can come up with great designs with decks even if the FAR for the deck is included, so I don't think that wd necessarily be a fact. 
And the whole point of the OCP to reduce to .35 was to reduce size, and I think the point the group was trying to make was that if you don't include covered decks just b/c they don't have a wall on one of the four sides, that in fact negates the feeling of trying to reduce b/c all you do is you build your house to .35FAR and then you put this huge deck on it wch isn't going to be counted.  And I think that was one of their concerns, so I wd like Ccl to consider, that's where it came from, and I think there's a confusion around, ambivalence between the definition of covered decks and they wanted that cleared up and for it to be included so the intent cd be carried through, houses too big for the lot
[I gave Lock Gibbs's email to Sop]
SJN: I made a reference in there to the wrong street, I apologize for that, it's actually Ottawa Street, I might have said Mathers on the report; it was Ottawa, a house being constructed on Ottawa street
{To clarify: SJN wrote Queens, and yes it was Ottawa, Ottawa Avenue.  In WV avenues go E-W and streets are numbered and go N-S.}

I've gone through the recommendations.  I actually had a subsequent mtg with Mr Gibbs about the various concerns and provided a number of photos of bldgs
I know Ccl was as excited as I am about the Zoning Bylaw minutiae.  I do intend to proceed with a review of many aspects of the Zoning Bylaw and house size is one of those
when ppl are involved in this, sometimes don't realize what they're suggesting has an impact wch they did not anticipate, and so what I intend to do in that review is assemble a technical cmte.  No reason why can't have normal residents, also involve architects and builders, and some of the inspectors.
Sometimes it's the subtleties of the regulations; the comment just made for example about house size.  House size will be on the table, whether to reduce it or not; it's currently limited to an FAR of .35, may find some debate in cmnty about reducing it, or wch part above or below grade; that's anticipated in the review
In City of Vanc where they did deal with the outdoor decks and started including them; will find bldg will build to max.  If they're penalized for adding on a deck they won't add on a deck.  Basically it's the entire house size you shd consider to reduce, not an element.

{Do you really think someone wd build a house without a deck if the owner wanted one?
Furthermore, it may be true decks not so common in Vancouver; decks are more desirable in WV b/c we actually have a view -- across the water to Vancouver, not so much to the house across the street.  Indeed most wd hardly think a deck with a view in WV means being penalized.  Let the markets decide.  Spec builders might learn that a house sited for a view without a deck will not sell as quickly or will be lower in price than one with a deck with a view.  The concern is that the decks don't make bigger houses than the size envisioned/intended with .35.
Lower houses to .30 and decks can be .05?  Lots of options can be considered.}

most successful review to date: here's what bylaw says and its intent -- here are alternatives you can consider and here are pros and cons; debate was v helpful, constructive
ended up with Ccl making major amendments to the Zoning Bylaw; approp at this time to do it, within next 12 months, will involve cmnty
discussed that with delegation that made presentation and they were happy with that.
Sop: I sent Mr Nicholls today a one-pager querying certain areas, he said he wrote this
guess we cd argue what is a storey and what constitutes a storey
in my corresp with him satisfied he concurs that a covered deck wd be a storey
interesting discussion with ppl in area wrt character and nbrhd
queston to Mr Nicholls: inasmuch as this has hit a certain area, wd it be reasonable that you wd not approve any more covered decks until we've rewritten the zoning bylaw?
SJN: not correct
if you eliminate covered decks, covered porches, verandas, you'd probably be eliminating almost ev attractive bldg in West Van, you'd probably be leaving some of the ones that are the least attractive
the concern of the delegation not covered decks in general but those on upper floors that extend great lengths, somewhat new in construction
not decks, was impacts on top floors on views and apparent mass and that's valid
will be looking at that within year, fairly quickly for a zoning bylaw review, and I believe that there'll be other matters coming up even more important
Sop: in my analysis of what constitutes a storey, did you conclude from that, even though you wrote it, bylaw as it stands today doesn't necessarily allow an interpretation of covered decks as we've seen recently by interpretation?
SJN: the statement made, actually made reference, this was the submission Ms Reynolds referred to, made reference to FAR controls and bldg height controls; and indicated b/c certain ht controls said one thing, so the FAR did as well, and it mixed up the two.
in terms of numbers of storeys, those decks that project beyond the bldgs are considered to be part of the top storey.  The question, specifically brought up by the Gibbses, is whether the bldg ht, not number of sq ft, the bldg ht in terms of number of ft, not number of storeys, they were not challenging the number of storeys, where was outside perimeter of bldg; shd it be measured from roof of the veranda projection; that was the specific question
the bylaw in that particular case says two things; it's ambiguous
b/c ambiguous, wd hv had a problem, we checked; we used both methods, did calculations, and was below 25ft so wd not affect that bldg constructed.  Do consider it to be a storey, wd not be able to put roof on a deck that's third storey, wd not be able to do that
when we report back on the bylaw, we'll be able to make recommendations wch you may reject for amendment
Mayor: further discussion, I'd like to know perhaps an evolutionary thing, keep Ccl updated as you go; wd like to know how this dovetails with nbrhd/character dialogue/survey, but Ccl has had an early look at today

{Even more infuriating than the F&A mtg the next day was, as I read this.  This indicates the Cmnty Survey had been seen by Ccl on the Monday, yet when it was discussed at the F&A mtg Tues, the next day, the mtg was closed and the public excluded.  Abuse of in camera legislation b/c it doesn't apply but they closed the mtg anyway.
Hate ignored and flouted slogans.}

maintaining character of WV is number one thing on ppl's minds
affordable housing and mixed family housing garners a bit more attention than no monster houses but I think they're all related
Ccl will want to look at not just how to continue to promote the character of WV in sgl-fam homes, but how we can look at zoning bylaws so that oversized homes aren't the largest threat to nbrhd character
that will entail other issues for wch there seems to be broad cmnty support like secondary suites, carriage houses; so keeping smaller home on smaller lot, and looking at an outbuilding, wch may preclude larger homes maximizing the area on the lot; all kind of fits together
Ccl's going to look to you, how that process and how we work through those issues; don't want to get bogged down in one issue and miss the forest for the trees
SJN: agree with you; think can be broken down into parts; looking at a regulatory review
some extent it's technical, some of the current regulations we have are not legal -- legislation has changed in meantime, or not well written when were written
updated in terms of our standards, things like increasing price of property has affected what's being constructed, amount of rock removal on lots, size of homes, maximization, those I'd term regulatory
other elements wrt landscape, heritage, uses, boulevards, some v much related to WG on Nbrhd Character; all dealt with but not necly at same speed; don't believe reg review shd be held up; when we mention one we shd be relating it to the other components
Mayor: when making motion might express that framework so moving toward comprehensive approach to this
VV: time is of the essence, we've had quite discontented residents for some years now, Clovelly-Caulfeild through that exercise, complaints from Amb areas, disheartened so much being lost, clear-cutting, blasting for large houses has already happened
if we don't get at this quite quickly, limited effect; with that sort of hope progress as a priority.
VV: so move
Mayor to SJN: you understand? we can talk tomorrow
I'm looking at the time, I know ppl here wrt Capilano Suspension Bridge PH in NV next week, quickly move through to 13 and to that

13.       Council Meeting Schedule for December 10, 2007
RECOMMENDED: THAT the December 10, 2007 Committee of the Whole Meeting be changed to a regular Council meeting
14.      Consent Agenda Items - Reports and Correspondence
RECOMMENDED: THAT the Consent Agenda items as follows be approved:
=B7        Item 15 - Development Variance Permit Application 07-042 (5517 Ocean Place) (to set date for consideration);
=B7        Item 16 -  Development Applications Status List; and
=B7        Item 17 -  Correspondence List.
Mayor: wd like to pull out 16
16.1: piece of correspondence from Mr Dozzi wrt Public Hearing
LX (cdn't catch name): public hearing tomorrow evening in NV; we live just off Rabbit Lane
this affects residents at Rabbit Lane and Moyne
existing usage from 12Ksf through this bylaw, dubious how being process through DNV, not through rezoning/normal process
will increase to 80Ksf, 5Ksf of wch on our/west side of prop
we've had five years trucks ...  probs with CSB; thunder of trucks
accessing through GVRD lane through two houses; while saying not going to do this
inside building but this new one does not specify inside so cd have outside entertainment
bylaws pushed through without proper process
review these two letters I'll leave with you tonight, one has errors in process
request that you as a Ccl, requesting proper public process
wd be that you wd not be able to ... ; wd like to see this process extended; serious issue to nbrhd, traffic, we in Brit Props can't run a commercial biz so why allow one to run one through our road
Sop: based on prop ownership; CSB owns that, is it incumbent on this M to allow use of GRVRD road
CAO: required for our crews to use it; reasonableness, we've got to point that gate and sometimes locked
Mayor: now understand a GVRD staff has to come and unlock
Archie Raffer: to follow up what Mr O'Connor is saying
just involved with it the last 12 to 16 mos
watching this ccl mtg tonight, shows more of a protocol this situation shd be in
rushed through in a hurried manner without much time for stakeholders
just learned tonight that GVRD tonight just notified,  met with principals ..., works for Metro Vancouver
construction on westside? CSB denied
first reading on Nov 5, Metro Vancouver was notified on 2nd and they had to speak on Monday
Gail Martin, Mitch Slovinski (sp?) prez of Metro Vanc
Mayor: she's chair
Archie: requested delay
access through GVRD land; WV is the nbr to GVRD so we'd have to.... to fix whatever they have
they're sending  a letter tomorrow, wd urge you to do same
more complex than we know; bylaw wd allow 80Ksf on east side; who knows -- 5Ksf on west side where go from there
JC: move to extend mtg to close of biz
Mayor, also impressed: wow!
Man: for immediate action -- process that has taken place leads us to tomorrow night
process offensive; been going on for five years
Mr Barth, Mr Stuart, Mr Dozzi, and Mayor been involved for X years
to find out...  posted once in Friday NSNews
to find out our Mayor and ppl who work with DWV -- no one  was informed by DNV or CSB; lacks integrity in our mind
didn't ... tomorrow 20th...  only by mail and arrived xxx
I'm offended by how we've been dealt with; been mtg with CSB all summer and then to find out all of a sudden subvert the whole process by ramming this through
pls attend tomorrow night, time extended or motion rescinded
reason we live in WV in Brit Props, I've lived in WV for 50 years, house my parents brought me home from hospital; I bought here a few years ago
only one access/egress; quiet, no traffic; consider how we might enforce, no commercialization; how for our nbrs
Mayor: we received email Nov 14, that Nov 20; any legal requirement?
SJN: M decides who wd be affected and how notified
Mayor: apologize doing this at 10 o'clock at night but only time
Sop: approp for you, Mayor, to draft a letter to postpone or withdraw public mtg until such time we've had time to digest what we have to see on our side
CAO: I have a suggestion -- just don't let DNV know
{much laughter considering Dave Stuart will be working there come January}
...... attend the mtg
closure of the public hearing be delayed by at least one month in order to consider the impact on WV ....... be advised DWV opposed .... zoning wch may ... and allow outdoor activity .....
[Sop moved and VV seconded]
Mayor: not in receipt of that proposal
Man: you are by the fact that you have....; second letter is in response to that
Mayor: we will need time to consider that
Sop: will staff be at mtg?
CAO: imp that we not just respond, but
Sop: wd that be you?
[more laughter]
16.  REPORTS FOR CONSENT AGENDA -- Development Applications Status List ... received.
Mayor: except 16.1
Mayor: seeing nothing, Public Questions
CAO: wasn't sure any conversation with Ccl wrt 16.5
Mayor: oh, right, thank you; wrt Howe Sound Cmnty Forum and letter drafted by Mayor Barry Janek and Max Wyman, opposing burning of coal at the Howe Sound Pulp and Paper Mill, quite controversial; report is there, want to flag it for you; mayors are considering sending a submission to the Min of the Envmt; did provide it on-table for you tonight, ideal if on agenda next Monday
CAO: simple motion, matter be referred back to Ccl next wk


George Pajari:  Your Worship and Members of Council, begging your indulgence at this late hour for 65 seconds
I am here to ask you to commit to having appropriate public consultation in advance of any decision to dispose of the Wetmore Lands.
My concern has been prompted by comments earlier this year to the effect that selling the Wetmore properties to pay for the new Community Centre was always the plan.
Yet a review of the reports and documents from that time say nothing about having to sell the Wetmore property to pay for the new Community Centre. In fact, the Planning Advisory Committee specifically recommended against selling the site and suggested considering the sale of other lands to reimburse the Endowment Fund instead
Earlier this year, the fiscal sustainability task force recommended that property sales be done in the context of a complete inventory of municipally owned property.
My fear is that Council in the past has liberally interpreted the Community Charter and held discussions about land use in secret even though not strictly conforming to the requirements of Section 90 (1) (e).
Given that history, I am afraid West Vancouver might wake up one morning to find out that you have sold the jewel in the crown of West Van's property investments to cover the budget overruns on the community centre.
So in summary, will Council commit to having an open public process prior to making any decisions on the disposal of the Wetmore Lands?
CAO: Some remarks: there is no budget overrun; in 2004/2005 invited submissions and received only two; this very issue will be on the public agenda next week
Mayor: we will adhere to a very public process
GP: very glad to hear that there are no budget overruns and therefore no need to sell the property

CR: that was good news indeed, b/c we were promised wide consultation about it.
[I shd hv said that one request or one or two submissions a couple of years ago does not qualify as wide consultation quite apart from changing circumstances and views.}
Before the question I wanted to ask:
To follow up on the Ccl Procedures [discussed earlier], one thing I wd like to say is that one of the reasons given [for two days] was that it had to be closer to the time b/c some letters wd be given to you v late.
may I suggest that having the actual agenda items earlier is more important than getting a few letters later, and so I wdn't let getting the letters [delay the rest of the agenda being known to the public].  It does say we have to put our letters in 11 days before the mtg, so I don't know how you're going to square that circle
Secondly, if you have a problem with reports getting there v late so it's difficult for you to digest wch I perfectly think is v good [to have time], it's difficult for you, it's difficult for the public.
Just as they suggested to Ccl Vaughan that if it wasn't enough time that the item be deferred to the next mtg, so if the [staff] report is late, that item shd go to the next mtg,
Just b/c reports might be later is not a reason to not have [earlier notification] -- and I'm glad you said biz days b/c that's not what it said in the Procedures [document we have], so thank you for clarifying that b/c it wasn't there, wch is why I said it.
if those reports are late then the staff reports/item shd be delayed, rather than delaying [the agenda notification].
Next I appreciate, following up, [staff saying] that [the agenda] shd be on the website, and the answer was that perhaps it wd break down.  Well the website has been working quite well for a long time now, it was early days as was said.  There were times in the past when the photocopier broke down -- these things can happen to anything.  Just b/c it might break down doesn't mean you don't try to do as much as you can to inform and involve the public asap.
Mayor: thank you; believe that is what we intend to do, what we are doing; but I think wrt the sensitivity of public notification for something like a rezoning you really can't risk any small mistake, you really can't.  So, we will absolutely... I shd also mention that our website is being redone this year b/c we realize it offers huge potential that we're not using as well as we cd
CR: you cd put in your Procedures 'best efforts' or something so that wd allow for a breakdown
Anyway the reason [I'm at PQP/C].
Thank you v much for all the support; we're still trying to save the Erickson-designed house, the Graham residence [listed as primary in our heritage inventory].  There was a mtg on site last week and there is going to be a mtg with representatives this week, so we have our fingers crossed to try to save that gem.
20. ADJOURNMENT [10:10]
2.   ADOPTION OF MINUTES of Nov 19 Public Hearing/Public Meeting
3.   The North Shore Black Bear Network, regarding Bears, Attractants and Bylaws... received for information.
4.   Community Centre Governance Working Group Final Report and Recommendations
1.   Approval be given to establish an interim Board that will create a non-profit society for the governance of the new community centre;
2.   A partnership agreement with the new society be established outlining each partner's role, responsibility and reporting relationship for Council approval;
3.   A nominating committee composed of members of the current working group and Council be established to recruit the first Board;
4.   The new society be required to enter into a partnership agreement with Vancouver Coastal Health Authority and all the other private and non-profit organizations that will be operating within the new community centre subject to pre-existing agreements;
5.   The new society carry out its governance role based on the following six values:
        a. Community -- the centre is a gathering place; a place where everyone is welcome and feels at home;
        b. Innovation -- new approaches are tried and centre users are encouraged to propose new ideas and programs;
        c.  Learning -- everyone is seen as a learner and has experiences that enrich their lives;
        d.  Partnership -- staff, volunteers, and centre users work together in an integrated manner;
        e.  Inclusivity -- all the programs and services reflect the demographics and diversity of the community; and
        f.   Responsibility -- stewardship of a sustainable community.
6.   An external review of the non-profit society be carried out after a two-year period to examine how the Board, staff, and volunteers are achieving the Centre's values; how the model is making a difference in the community, and how the partners are working together; and
7.   An allocation of $30,000 to the new society be approved for initial start up cost in the 2008 budget.
5.   West Vancouver Community Survey 2007:  Report dated Nov 16 be received for information.
{outrageous! this item at the F&A Cmte mtg Tues was declared in camera and public not allowed in -- it does NOT qualify!}
6.   Dog Walking Access and Regulation on Municipal Park Lands
            1. Staff undertake a review of the Parks Regulation Bylaw and Animal Control and Licence Bylaw in order to determine where changes might be required or desirable.
            2. Staff undertake a review of regulatory signs in Parks with an intention to provide effective, friendly direction to park visitors with dogs and to minimize the proliferation of signs.
            3. Staff report back to Council by March 31, 2008 with results of the review and with recommendations for Bylaw and park sign program amendments.
7.  Update on Community Heritage Register:  report from the Sr. Community Planner dated Nov 16 received for information.
8.  Community Heritage Register and Hollyburn Lodge
            1.         The District of West Vancouver Community Heritage Register be established, pursuant to Section 954 of the Local Government Act; and
            2.         The inclusion of Hollyburn Lodge in the District of West Vancouver Community Heritage Register be approved.
9.   Wetmore Site - Recommendations Respecting Possible Disposition
RECOMMENDED: THAT Staff be authorized to bring forward a Request for Proposals package that would describe the objectives, criteria and process for the disposition of the Wetmore Lands, based upon the proposals in the November 19, 2007 report of the Director of Planning, Lands and Permits, for consideration and approval by Council.
10.  Howe Sound Community Forum regarding Potential Coal Burning at Howe Sound Pulp & Paper, Port Mellon: Further information to be provided.                                                
11.  Community Engagement Policy Amendment
RECOMMENDED: THAT the amendments to the Community Engagement Policy, as set out in the policy document attached to the report titled "Community Engagement Policy Amendment", be approved.
12.  Zoning Bylaw No. 2200, 1968, Amendment Bylaw No. 4530, 2007 (re Shell Gas Station, 1305 Marine Drive)
            The Public Hearing/Public Meeting closed on November 19, 2007.
            RECOMMENDED: second and third reading
13.  [Five-]Year Financial Plan Bylaw No. 4510, 2007, Amendment Bylaw No. 4529, 2007
Previous background report received at the Nov 19 Council Meeting: "Mid-Year Review - Budget Amendment Bylaw"
This bylaw received first reading at the November 19, 2007 Council Meeting and was made available for public comment.
            RECOMMENDED: second and third reading                              
BYLAWS for Adoption
14.  Council Procedure Bylaw No. 4483, 2006 (Revised)
15.  Animal Control and Licence Bylaw No. 4208, 2000, Amendment Bylaw No. 4531, 2007 - Dangerous Dogs
16.      Consent Agenda Items - Reports and Correspondence
.  Item 17 - Development Variance Permit Application 07-039 (4102 Burkehill Road) (to set date for consideration on December 10, 2007); and
.  Item 18 - Correspondence List.
17.       Development Variance Permit Application 07-039 (4102 Burkehill Road)
RECOMMENDED: THAT the report dated Nov 16, titled DVP Application 07-039 (4102 Burkehill Road) be received for consideration on Monday, December 10, 2007.
18.       Correspondence List: RECOMMENDED received.
Requests for Delegation
(1)       Undated, regarding Request for Delegation: Naming of Trails on Eagleridge Bluffs
Referred to the Mayor and Council for consideration and response.
o  Action Required
(2)       C.A. Reynolds [Editor, WVM], Nov 20, 2007, regarding Council Procedure Bylaw No.  4483, 2006
Referred to the Director of Administrative Services for consideration and response.
(3)       November 13, 2007, regarding Ice Arena Schedule
Referred to the Director of Parks & Community Services for consideration and response.  Attachments available for viewing in the Legislative Services Department.
o  No Action Required (receipt only)
(4)       M.T. Rogan, Emergency Preparedness Conference, November 01, 2007, regarding 2007 Award of Excellence Presentation - North Shore Emergency Management Office
(5)       C. Pickard, The Council of Canadians, November 07, 2007, regarding Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement (TILMA) and the Union of BC Municipalities Conference
(6)       November 12, 2007, regarding Civic Centre Parking
(7)       C. DeMarco, Division Manager, Regional Development, Policy & Planning Department, Metro Vancouver, November 13, 2007, regarding Metro Vancouver's Regional Growth Strategy Review - Public Consultation Program
Previously distributed due to timing of event.  Attachments available for viewing in the Legislative Services Department.
(8)       I. Chong, Minister of Community Services and Minister Responsible for Seniors' and Women's Issues, November 13, 2007, regarding Traffic Fine Revenue Sharing Grant (File: 0925?03?04)
Previously distributed due to timing of matter.
(9)       November 15, 2007, regarding West Vancouver Fire Safety and Contemplated Changes
(10)     Undated, regarding Fire and Rescue Services
o  Responses to Correspondence
(11)     B.A. Dozzi, Manager, Roads & Transportation, November 13, 2007, regarding Motorcycle Noise and Speed
(12)     B.A. Dozzi, Manager, Roads & Transportation, November 13, 2007, regarding Damaged Median Fence
o  Responses to Questions in Question Period -- No items presented.
===  ERICKSON UPDATE  ===  Still on Death Watch for Graham Residence

***   QUESTION: is dismantling allowed before a demolition permit has been issued?

***   Appreciate article on the house in Sunday Nov 19th NSNews, mentioned in VSun from NSN, and excellent Nov 22 article with all facts correct in Vancouver Province.   This last asked for comments to be sent to provletters@png.canwest.com (or faxed).  Some weeks ago the Outlook asked about retaining heritage (at the time of the loss of the Hugo Ray cabin), Arthur Erickson Foundation was on CBC's As It Happens, and Friday's NSN (Nov 23) had ["Enquiring] Reporter asking if more shd be done to protect heritage buildings and all five asked said YES! 
***   Hope there'll be another mtg but at mtg Thursday was told:
  = rotted, mouldy, but on a site visit about ten days ago didn't see this, and an architect who viewed the house said didn't see much rot and definitely house cd be restored, another person said dry ice can be blown at mildew to remove it (I didn't see this either and one person in the site visit is extremely allergic to mildew and was on site for half an hour without a reaction)
  = tenants were in the house until three months ago (so that certainly means it was livable!)
  = 2007 assessment is $3.7M but that must be low -- just think of it: a home on the waterfront, private at the end of a road, spectacular view, designed by a world famous architect.......  low assessment for low taxes??????
  = owners want a house 7Ksf (and do also have homes in Brit Props)
  = new house wd be concrete and glass
  = house was originally 3500sf but addition has brought it up to over 5Ksf -- my reaction was to say if the owner wanted to add 2 to 3000 sf, that wd be fine as long as similar architecture so sympathetic (ie, don't add a carbuncle, to borrow a phrase from Prince Charles)
  = msg left a M Hall was that owner intent on demolition
***  One of my fears is that the 'off shore' owners may not know how significant and precious the house is.  The Lalji brothers own Larco and Park Royal.  Maybe one can speak to this one apparently who has been living in London.  Talking to the builder, a very nice person, is unsettling b/c one wonders if he'd be happy losing his project to build a new house if the present one is restored/retained.
**  I want to make sure my invitation to encourage the owner to 'blue sky' and give a wishlist will get through to and be favourably received and understood by the owner.  IMO, DWV cd not offer money, but what if the owner wanted a density transfer? special zoning or concessions at another property?   My offer to owner's rep was just to ask what he wanted.  Let us consider it.  We have to try.  It must be impressed on the owners how v special this home is -- in many architectural books and a landmark in Canadian architectural history.  One architect described it to me as a work of art.
***  Desperately need a solution that is win-win-win-win-win -- for the owner, for the District, for heritage, for Canada, for Arthur Erickson.  There are many creative thinkers in West Vancouver.  There are eight Erickson homes in WV they say, and only one is on a par or better/more famous than this one -- the Gordon Smith House.
        PLS WRITE ro heritage@westvan.org or phone 922 4400; fax 484 5992.
Have received phone calls and here's a
***  LETTER from READER -- To: <heritage@westvan.org>
Subject: Graham Residence
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 18:16:42 -0800
 I am writing because of my concern over the possible demolition of the Graham Residence, designed by Arthur Erickson and built in 1965.  I have seen  photographs of it on Arthur Erickson's Web site, and was impressed by the  functional beauty of the design for the site on the rocks. Surely something  can be done to preserve it, and with it, a piece of the architectural history of West Vancouver.
Yours,  Dr. A.J. M.

For info on the Vancouver production, see: http://www.touchstonetheatre.com/productions/tideline.php
We saw the play Nov 18, it ends Nov 24 (at Roundhouse Cmnty Ctr).
It's a fable by Wajdi Mouawad (now living in Quebec, numerous awards), translated by Shelley Tepperman; it was better than the video we'd rented a couple of years ago (richer, more poetic), and much better than Peter Birnie's review in the VSun -- may be he saw it at the beginning, b/c often performances get better as the actors settle in.
It was so complex with many woven strands, the poem that came out while watching had to be a tanka.  Even so, I cdn't get 'nightmares' in.

                a mixture of death,
                dreams, loss, imagination,
                revulsion, film, sex,
                        fatherhood, war, love, mem'ries,
                        killing, baggage of past, life

Endless money forms the sinews of war.   -- Marcus Tullius Cicero, statesman, orator, writer (106 - 43 BCE)

Money is only useful when you get rid of it.  It is like the odd card in 'Old Maid'; the player who is finally left with it has lost.           -- Evelyn Waugh, English writer (1903 - 1966)

A man has only one way of being immortal on earth: he has to forget he is a mortal.
                        -- Jean Giraudoux, French writer (1882 - 1944)

Man's mind stretched to a new idea never goes back to its original dimensions.
                                -- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr., American (1809 - 1894)

The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.
                                -- F. Scott Fitzgerald, American writer (1896 - 1940)
Elizabeth Bowen:
        One can live in the shadow of an idea without grasping it.
Emile Chartier:
        Nothing is more dangerous than an idea when it is the only one you have.
Arthur Erickson:
=  God's designs may be frequent justification for our actions, but it is we, the self-made men, who take the credit.
=  Roman civilization had achieved, within the bounds of its technology, relatively as great a mastery of time and space as we have achieved today.
=  We settled this continent without art. So it was easy for us to treat it as an imported luxury, not a necessity.
        A smile or groan to close..........
                A duck walks into a pharmacy, waddles up to the , and says "Chapstick, please."
                "Will that be cash or charge?' asks the clerk.
                "Just put it on my bill," says the duck.