It has been said for years that the Trudeau government has no interest in getting more immigrants into Canada other than harvest their electoral votes at election time. 

We haven’t got enough resources to look after our own people, never mind bringing in another 140,000 immigrants annually. Just heard on the news that the new numbers are 500,000 new immigrants in 2025. Due to our low birth rates in Canada, we need immigrants, however we also need to be able accommodate them.

Sufficient affordable housing is not available for the current population. Oil, which was our financial backbone and salvation in the past, is being cut off and taxed as much or more than possible, leaving us with humongous deficits. The Liberals are riding the World Economic Forum’s disastrous ride to a one-world governing system.

The housing crisis created by the Liberals and Bank of Canada is going to carry a very heavy financial burden on the Canadian taxpayers because they are already talking about a new twist in financing which will subsidize the people whose mortgages mature. No doubt the banks will want higher rates on renewals.

So much of this dog and pony show is merely to garner more votes for the Liberals.

Eldon Unger,
White Rock, B.C.

To The Editor
Nov. 21, 2022

“Transparency is absolutely critical to healthy democracy. People have a right to know the kinds of decisions and actions that are taken – and understand how it impacts them, their communities, and the general public,” Patricia Kosseim, Ontario’s Information and Privacy Commissioner. 

The recently elected Lantzville Council running on an anti development and against a higher density housing agenda, as well as unbroken social media accusations of lack of transparency by the previous council, seems to have missed that point.

On Nov 3 2022, their first business meeting “in camara”, and bypassing all normal legislated procedures ; “that all bylaws must be read and adopted in a meeting that is open to the public” they unanimously decided their first bylaw attempt should be developed behind a curtain. 

Under the umbrella of a seldom used legal clause , that a “ Notice of a special council meeting may be waived by unanimous vote of all council members” the new council effectively bypassed the democratic process and had a private one evening hush-hush rendezvous to lay the groundwork for a new tree bylaw. The same evening, council proceeded , to 1st, 2nd and 3rd “public” reading, conveniently without any audience or serious community and stake holder input. Few Lantzville property owner were aware of what was happening. The new tree protection bylaw was adopted Nov 5. 

Possibly recognizing their election promised transparency objective was seriously compromised, in another unusual move[JdJ1]  with a Machiavellian touch, council decided to ask for community input after the fact. The district’s web site phrasing is revealing; “ are there any complaints regarding the new tree bylaw”. I don’t believe there is much sincerity in that request as any changes to the bylaw would likely mean the original bylaw would needs to be rescinded. 

Not many Lantzville residents would be opposed to a practical tree bylaw but pragmatism, fairness and tree protection appears not to have been a serious deciding factor. The few treed properties in focus were for the most part non contiguous small acreages zoned and taxes residential, inter dispersed with existing housing and scheduled for housing and development in the official community plan. 

It is always difficult to read a new council’s mindset, more so when the discussions are “in camera” At first blush this bylaw is not so much about the environment and trees, but more as a disincentive for needed housing using a tree bylaw. This analysis would be consistent with the Lantzville Community Association (LCA) and council members previously associated with the organization objectives to limit density and housing diversity. The fact that the new bylaw does not apply to properties less than one acre, which includes most of Lantzville housing and urban trees, is perhaps most revealing, but without any public discussion and stakeholder input who really know ?

J.A.  de Jong
Lantzville Nov 2022

Canada is the meat in the sandwich between China and Russia. China is looking for war because of the economic situation that President Zi has caused. Russia is already on a war footing and could think splitting the west would give them an advantage over NATO.

The alliance in SE Asia may not be strong enough to contain China. NATO would give Russia a good beating. Of course nuclear war is the fly in the ointment. Canada has a PM who has weakened Canada substancialy. Russia might attack us from the north and claim some of the Arctic ocean, like it worked in Crimea.

Remember Trudeau senior was a chicken and avoided WW2. Maybe junior will act like his father. His policies are somewhat similar. Any fool can spend money and Trudeau is one.

Frank Stevens,
Aug. 26, 2022

The Editor

It sounds like climate denier will be a crime. Well jail me because we have been fed too many lies from our political elite. There is enough scientific evidence to support deniers. If you look.

Frank Stevens, Nanaimo

Editor,

Brian Peckford offers criticism of the Tories and offers no real solutions to Liberal/NDP rule.

Then he falls into the religion trap. Canadians want a clear separation between church and state. Period. The Liberals are masters of keeping that separation and then smashing us over the head with autocratic rule, one grade below communism.

But Canadians still have no alternative to the Liberals. Looks like Pierre Poilievre will pivot to the religious right if he is elected PM. Say it ain't so Pierre. Give us a clear path we can believe and hold you too.

Frank Stevens, Nanaimo

By Jack de Jong,

When  David Eby, the Minister responsible for housing, said; “the issues that we are seeing right now of dramatically escalating rents, vacancy rates below one per cent, people living in cars, people with jobs living in shelters” he has good reasons to be concerned.  Small municipal councils tend to be risk averse and the focus of future planning and zoning is more concerned with protecting your neighbour’s interest and preserving the status quo, than meeting the requirements of housing for lower income, seniors, single persons and young families.

The Lantzville Village South Development proposal is scheduled for another public hearing July 25. Things move slowly here. The earlier 2021 zoning proposal for some 732 mixed housing units on 23.27 HA (57.5 acres) was turned back to the applicant for improvement. Sugar coating a reduction of housing  as improvements is revealing of council attitudes. The real message was reduce the number of homes. The general tone of opposition, many of whom do not live close to the area and for a  neighbourhood that for now only exists on paper, suggests the new residents  quality of life could be seriously affected if our village core was to accommodate  that many homes. 

According to the last census Lantzville has a density is 137 people per square kilometer. Nanaimo  has 8 times that number, or 1,104  residents per square kilometer. We can hardly call ourselves overpopulated. As  Nanaimo’s neighbour we regularly project ourselves as a  small isolated self-sufficient rural community. Missing from that image is that  Lantzville’s  28 square kilometers is  a substantial 1/3 the geographic size of Nanaimo. Our utilities and services are for the most part integrated with Nanaimo and we do all our business in Nanaimo.  

The revised version for 632 units is now up for another painful community scrutiny. The advice from municipal planning experts indicates this low-to-medium-density development proposal is exactly what Lantzville’s village core needs to revitalize and it is consistent with Lantzville’s OCP.  Unfortunately, with the aid of  local social media mischief and some councillors sensing victory after the last reduction the new proposal is also on shaky ground. Lets hope they come to their senses and move on.

March 24, 2022
Responses to my recent column about who should determine the pay level for elected municipal officials. The responses are interesting.

MAYOR LEONARD KROG ­– Thank you Merv I think? Pay for politicians is the ultimate hot potato and not a topic any politicians like but having someone else dealing with it is very appealing.

COUNCILLOR ERIN HEMMENS – It would be so wonderful, and an extremely tough pill for the public to swallow. I had no idea the passion behind (the mayor’) view that elected rep pay is something basically not to be discussed. I get it, politically, but I also think that way of looking at it comes from the comfy position of someone at the end of their career, pensioned, with multiple properties. If we all went in with that padding, then his argument makes sense, but the reality is more and more of us don’t go in with that. Change has to happen at the provincial level for this to move forward, but I’m not sure it’ll get support. My second cup of coffee ramblings.

COUNCILLOR DON BONNER – I welcome the conversation.  A better compensation package for municipal councilors helps lower the barriers to many in our community who would make great leaders however can't afford to take off 4 years out of their career at a reduced pay.  When more people from diverse sections of our society are able to participate fully in the political process we get better decision making, in general.

While the mayor might have a problem talking about pay for politicians I welcome any conversations and decisions that help lower barriers for women, visible minorities, and young adults to fully participate in leadership of our city.

Gary Korpan

GUEST COMMENT BY GARY KORPAN

I, and no doubt most Nanaimo citizens, appreciate and salute Errin Holtz in challenging the residents of Nanaimo to clean up litter garbage from their neighbourhoods as part of Great Nanaimo Garbage Grab. It is a sad commentary that our patch of paradise is polluted with litter, garbage, back road dumping, graffiti and illegal signs. Even sadder is the clear lack of interest by so-called authorities to do something about the abuses.

When I see folks voluntarily picking up the debris left by scofflaws I feel sad that people who do not pollute are trying to do the job that should be done by the polluters themselves.

If we cannot convince everyone to take pride in Nanaimo's environment by not littering in the first place, then such scofflaws should be required to clean up such debris through enforced Community Service. 

I call upon City Council to convince the provincial and federal governments to include Community Service as a required component to every judicial and administrative sentence imposed on a person violating our laws and regulations. 

The Community Service sentence component would be proportionate to the offence, include litter debris clean up, removal of backroad dumping, clean up of vandalized property, killing invasive plant species, etc. It would be a long needed addition to the traditional sentences and would be carried out after the traditional sentences in the community where the offence occurred.

This is at least partial compensation to the community's cost of enforcement and to the directly damaged property owner. 

Every parole order should include such a requirement, since such offenders are likely the polluting types to begin with.

May I suggest you and fellow citizens demand our governments amend the laws to make serious Community Service a requirement for all offenders. 

Call your Councillor, MLA, and MP.

Lower Lantzville ––Photo submitted

220124 – The Lantzville District is in a quandary.  The small 1,600 single family home Mid Island community with an average house value well over $1 million is at the crossroads of some major council decisions. The interpretation of the “Official Community Plan” is at the centre of the controversy.

Lantzville’s OCP is a broad-based document trying to please everyone, sometimes incongruent and judging from social media comments objectionable to others. It is interesting to note the 2017 community wide OCP input survey had a response rate of only 37.3%. but now it seems everyone is involved

A recent rezoning proposal for the 50-acre residential zoned Ware Road property, shows every sign to meet the OCP requirements for housing diversity and relative affordability. It also has the potential for generating the critical minimum population to support a viable village centre and some jobs in the area. The project is expected to add 850 homes over an extended period to the Lantzville core.

Planning experts say the 17 units per acre is considered low to medium density. By comparison the Nanaimo Green Thumb proposal of 2500 homes on 42 acres or 60 units per acre would be four times the Ware Road density proposal. Both locations are approx. the same distance from the Nanaimo Woodgrove shopping area. 

While most residents and council members appear to support the OCP’s wording for more choice of housing, affordability, and village core revitalization, Others have a narrower view and consider the proposed density too high. Their vision is a continuation of large single family homes on large lots as the preferred  zoning for any future development.  

The challengers, under the umbrella of the newly created Lantzville Community Association (LCA) have taken the district to court and suggest the proposed density is far too high and exceeds the OCP limits. They have a point, but it is just that. The contradiction in their position is obvious. By default, their OCP interpretation would forfeit much of the needed housing diversity. Opinions run deep and by all accounts 2022 is going to be an interesting decision year for Lantzville’s future 

Jack de Jong
Former Mayor of Lantzville
Lantzville,  January, 2022

Please note, comments appear on the top right side of this page.

Gary Korpan

I will, no doubt, be accused of being "a real Grinch", or worse, for this...but it should be said.

If we are seriously concerned about climate change, global warming, and leaving a good environment to our children, why are people buying "live" Christmas trees? A misnomer if there ever was one. As well as grossly hypocritical. 

Why are you paying exorbitant rates for a now dead tree that was removing carbon dioxide from the air before it was killed on your behalf?

Once you haul it home and, three weeks later, haul it to a gas powered wood chipper, or the land fill, you will have needlessly added more carbon dioxide to the environment. Nice going "environmentalist". Does the word "hypocrisy" come to mind? 

Once the tree is in your house in a pot of water you spend inordinate time covering its natural beauty with mountains of garish plastic lights and ornaments. All products of a wasteful misuse of copper, petroleum based chemicals, and minerals. Again, adding to, not reducing, global warming. Then, for 3 weeks, you power it all up with electricity too often generated by coal or gas fired power plants. 

Would it not be far better to donate to reforestation projects than killing trees for ceremonies Christians appropriated from others? It would certainly be less hypocritical. 
Merry Christmas. 
Gary the Grinch Korpan

Send a response to Gary's letter below or editor@nanaimonet.com