Mayor Hall Reflects on Plan Implementation
Mayor Lyn Hall presides over his first meeting of City Council Dec 1, 2014. 250News archive
Prince George, B.C. – Mayor Lyn Hall and his eight-member council have just begun their eighth month of a four-year term of service to the people of Prince George, and 250 News checked in with the mayor on what has been accomplished since council was sworn in on December 1st, 2014.
We based our questions on the vision set out by Mayor Hall at that inaugural council meeting. The first deals strategic goals, including strengthening community partnerships with stakeholders such as CNC, UNBC, School District 57, DBIA, Northern Health, Chamber of Commerce and others.
Mayor Hall says “It’s proceeding very well. We’ve had a chance to meet with the Chamber, Construction Association, the Homebuilders Association, we’ve met with a group of commercial realtors of two occasions. We have had our first Neighbourhood Meeting on the Hart, I’ve met with two seniors’ organizations.”
“We’re in the middle of setting, it probably won’t happen now until September, but meeting with School District 57. We’ve created two education committees, one that Councilor Koehler is chairing, one that Councilor Merrick is chairing. One around sort of the connection between UNBC, CNC and School District 57 kind of from a business perspective and then the student one, which Councilor Merrick will look after, which is addressing student concerns.”
“So I would say that we, certainly from me I’m very happy about where we’re at seven months in when it comes to that reconnection that I talked about in the community. This fall, September, October, November, we’ll have more Neighbourhood Meetings” (dates and locations to be discussed by council). “And I’ve been meeting with various organizations throughout the community as a representative of council and getting that information back to council. So, it’s gone very well, I’m very pleased with it.”
Committee restructuring to meet community needs was set out as another priority by the mayor, who says “it’s developing very well, the group of nine of us I think have really come together as a cohesive group. We went through the strategic planning session in February which really gave us an opportunity to talk about each one of our strengths. There are really diverse interests around the table and we had an opportunity to talk about each one of them and that created our strategic plan. We’re going to review that strategic plan again this fall because we all realize that this document is moving and shifting, almost day-to-day at times.”
“All of the standing committees we have councilors who are appointed to those committees as chairs who bring their strengths and knowledge to those particular committees. That was important for me, that was important that the committees were aligned with councilors who had strengths and interest in those particular areas and it’s worked out very well.”
Hall says all of council’s committees are now established and there may be a couple more. “As you know we may be looking at the Economic Advisory Committee that will really be responsible for looking at where we go from an economic development perspective, the economic driver and the economic arm of the City.”
Mayor Hall could not say whether Initiatives Prince George CEO Heather Oland has accepted a proposal to manage the City’s in-house economic development functions once IPG’s service agreement expires at the end of this year. He says that matter would best be addressed by City Manager Kathleen Soltis, however 250 News was told, while trying to contact her, that Ms Soltis will not be back in the office until Monday.
At his swearing-in last December the mayor spoke of attracting business to the city. We asked if he has seen positives in that area. “We have seen positives and I think part of it is we talked about creating that foundation that businesses, no matter what type of business they were, would see Prince George as a strong place to invest and to develop.”
“So from that perspective we’re seeing a lot of interest around hotel, the seniors housing and that’s something we’ve been working on for the last, probably, five or six months and we’re hoping that we’ll see that start to come to fruition this fall. Will there be announcements? I’m cautiously optimistic. But we’re seeing a great deal of uptake on businesses looking at developing and locating here in Prince George.”
“We take a look at the Pomeroy (Hotel) which is on the books, the Marriott Hotel, cautiously optimistic that that will be up and going soon and completing construction on it. We’re seeing the development on the corner of 6th and Quebec, we’re seeing the BCGEU building, we have the WIDC park which is in the works, probably nothing done until 2016 but some conversations need to take place with the community there.”
Mayor Hall also says there’s another sign of increased economic activity in the city. “We’ve seen a $6 million increase in building permits over last year at this time which, for us, is a huge indication of the upswing in the economy. Prince George Native Friendship Centre are doing a large men’s home and in other areas of the community I’ve talked to developers about a senior’s complex in the Hart.”
“We’re continuing to see development out west with new stores coming to town and filling up the mall space area across the street from Walmart. It was a hit when Target left but it looks like the (Pine Centre) mall has another anchor tenant to go in there. So we’re seeing the work that we’ve been doing, the conversations and discussions and meetings we’ve been having with developers starting to come around.”
“From a residential perspective our numbers are up, we’re seeing the continuation of construction up at University Heights and certainly stand-alone residential, people aren’t just building one or two homes at a time, that’s on the increase.”
Seven months ago Mayor Hall discussed setting a sound financial framework which would see the City thrive. Today he says “this new council, very early on, picked up from the budget work that was done by the previous council. We had to have our budget, which included the taxation piece, done by May and so now what’s happening is we’re going to be receiving a facilities audit on all of our facilities. We’re going to be doing a review on aquatic facilities, we’re going to be looking at our fleet, and it’s all this infrastructure that this council will have to deal with over the next number of months as we move into the next budget cycle for 2016.”
“So when I talked about sound fiscally and a sound financial direction it was all about looking and reviewing what our infrastructure costs are going to be and set a plan in place where we could at least have a longer term commitment on what we could do to replace, refurbish our aging facilities and our infrastructure. So that’s all going to be coming back to this council for review and decision-making on it.”
Where can the fund for repairing, refurbishing and replacing be found? The special tax levy instituted in 2011 for capital projects for the Canada Winter Games ceases to exist, at least in its present form, at the end of 2015. The levy raised $9.6 million for the City’s share of capital projects totaling $17.4 million for the Games.
Mayor Hall says “the levy had a completion date of December 31st, 2015, so it just lives it’s life and that’s it, that 2015 Games levy is over.” Asked if it might be replaced by another tax under a different name he says “no it’s gone. Part of the conversation that we will have to have is alright, if we’ve looking at X number of dollars to replace our fleet or our infrastructure, how do we go about financing and paying for these costs.”
“You might want to take the Four Seasons Pool, it requires work, or the Elk Centre. How do we fund that bill? I think the other piece of this is, do we need to absolutely do all of the work in 2016. Is there work there, and that’s what we’re going to see in the report, that there will be short-term expenditures and getting into longer-term expenditures so ones that may have to be done immediately and then ones that may be spread over a period of time. But in many respects we’re playing catch-up with some of this stuff.”
One of the key planks in Lyn Hall’s mayoralty campaign and one of the points he stressed at his inaugural meeting was a commitment to transparency, inclusion within the City, re-connecting council with the community, things many said were sadly lacking under the previous administration.
We asked the mayor about the recent path council took in re-naming a park, not the issue of changing names but the way council proceeded on the matter. Many residents felt “transparency” and “inclusion” were lacking. We asked Mayor Hall if, firstly, he was surprised at the public backlash toward the decision being made at council. “I was surprised at some of it, yes, though I know from past experience that when you look at changing or re-naming something that it will carry a lot of conversation, a lot of comments. I was surprised somewhat and I guess on the other side of it I did anticipate that we would have some feedback.”
Notice that the re-naming was to come up for consideration at the June 15th meeting of council came out five days earlier when the meeting’s agenda was released on June 10th. Some people felt the matter was rushed through council. One councilor, Albert Koehler, felt public input might be sought. In fact the proponent of the name change, Councilor Murry Krause, had considered the idea of gathering public input but decided against it.
Mayor Hall says “I can certainly appreciate comments that we’re getting, right from “you should have brought the community in”, to there were a few saying there should have been a referendum on it. So I can certainly appreciate where people are coming from there.”
Do you think that there should have been a community discussion before a final decision was made on this matter? Mayor Hall responded “well maybe what we could have done is had a greater community discussion at council even, that evening. You know that certainly could have been a possibility.” And again the mayor says he can appreciate the concerns expressed “given the timing around the decision.”
“We could have looked at it and done it in a public fashion whether it be at a public council meeting as we did on that Monday night when we talked about it or put it into another time period or another venue to have that public conversation. As it turned out Councilor Krause was correct in wanting to look at getting the name change announced on National Aboriginal Day.”
The day he was sworn into office Mayor Hall also stressed the importance of a strong team, and feels that’s what he has with the present council. “I think it’s working extremely well as a body. We all knew each other in some form or fashion before we got on council, and then you get around the council table and it’s certainly a different dynamic. You knew each other outside of council and then all of a sudden you’re all on council together. So it didn’t take very long for us to really gel as a group.”
“That’s not to say that we haven’t had debate, but debate is good. We don’t always necessarily agree with our colleagues but I think it’s healthy to have a debate. It’s happening, we’re rowing in the same direction. We came out of that strategic planning session with as clear vision of what each one of us feels about the various issues we talked about in that session. We were pulling in the same direction when we developed that strategic plan and that’s important to a council. So I’m very pleased with the way we’ve gelled.”
Comments
I have to say, so far the Mayor is doing a much better job sharing his plans for the present and future. Past Mayors, especially the last one, seemed to forget to connect with the people. I believe it was so bad that on most weeks you would be hard pressed to hear a peep from the Mayor, and never see a whole writeup like we see above.
For myself, I think the City has to be the first to set a good example and make this City look attractive so people will want to live here and move here from other places. The citizens and businesses of Prince George also need to do their part. Want to live in a nice City, we can all be part of the solution. Tend to your houses and storefronts and make them tidy and inviting to others. The sooner we all pitch in and do our share, the faster we get rid of this negative image we seem to have of Prince George.
I sure hope the City is successful in dealing with these eyesore properties like the old laundromat building and the lot beside the old Ric’s Grill. They are currently black eyes on the face of PG, let’s finally deal with them.
Good job so far from the Mayor. Still lots more to do!!!
The renaming of Fort George Park is a real issue with the people of Prince George. It was poorly handled and rushed through with very little thought. Mayor and Council should read the letter in Friday’s paper. The renaming of Fort George Park must be rescinded immediately before we get any more egg on our faces.
“In fact the proponent of the name change, Councilor Murry Krause, had considered the idea of gathering public input but decided against it.”
Hey when did Krause become Mayor. I think he may be getting a little big for his boots.
I don’t get the paper, what was the gist of the letter?
Considering how the name change of the park went down and the ignoring or ignorance of the parks history gives me little confidence of any other decisions this council and mayor may have going forward.
Here you go seamutt. I put it in point form.
The village established at the park in question was not burned down.
In 1910 several groups offered to buy the First Nation reserve at Fort George, the Grand Trunk Rail Co. was the successful bidder. They bought the land, buildings and cemetery. It appears the Railway returned the cemetery to the Federal Indian Affairs Department.
There was approximately 100 people in the village at the time, who stayed there until the spring of 1914
The village council with the advice of Father Coccola decided to move to Shelley and a site nine kilometers up the Nechako on the north side.
The government of BC approved of the move and paid for new houses, etc.
The buildings at Fort George were old and of no value so they were burned for safety reasons.
As for the desecration of the graves in the Fort George cemetery, the cemetery belongs to the Indian Affairs Department of the Federal Government, not the people of Shelley.
The Mayor and Council need to come clean on this issue (of renaming our show case park) if they are going to have any credibility going forward. The renaming of Fort George Park may seem a small issue, but in reality it is not. It was renamed under false pretenses and distortion of history, which robs our identity as a City celebrating 100 years.
The history of the Park was obliterated and replaced with falsehoods so that one Alderman with an agenda could push that agenda through at all costs. That mayor and council could admit that they rammed this through before the public could become aware of it because it wouldn’t be well received just takes the cake. Mayor and council should pat themselves the back for that one. Way to dismiss and divide the community that elected you. Well done.
Hey Mayor Lyn Hall and Council, you are in good company! Here is another City Mayor and Council that is getting it “right”!!!
www. npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2014/10/12/354274630/seattle-swaps-columbus-day-for-indigenous-peoples-day
Copy and paste the link to your browser address bar, then delete the space between the www. and the n
If the Mayor and Council want to do the right thing about the rebranding of Fort George Park they should be striking a Committee of Council co-chaired by a member chosen by the Lheidli T’enneh and a member chosen by Council who has done research on the history surrounding the piece of property in question, most likely someone from UNBC or even UBC.
The letter in the Citizen has it wrong as well as I may have. The main source I use are the newspapers of the day which have been digitized and reside at the Library, amongst other places along with my knowledge of how transactions of Indian Reserves work.
IRs are a creation of the Federal Government and fall under their jurisdiction. IRs were created across the land prior to the arrival of the railroads, encouraged by the Feds to settle the West. There were about 100 IRs which were exchanged for new IRs as the rail came west.
Not uncommonly the IRs were in prime locations. Some may have been considered prime by the local natives before the arrival of Europeans, others were prime for European traders who built trading posts or defenders of the territory who built forts, and then there were also the situations where the indigenous people moved closer to the posts.
Those same locations were also considered prime by the railroads since there were already inhabitants there who would use the new transportation corridor. They needed land to sell to new settlers.
Prince George was not unique at all. The system was the same across the country with respect to the disposition of the IRs. When a railroad or developer was interested in an IR, the Indian Act was changed to allow the “sale” of the IR to the Feds. The “sale” was made for direct payment to the members of the band, the provision of a new IR at some distance from the original one, and the rebuilding of new structures for the families as well as a Church for the missionaries who were typically complicit in the transactions.
Once the agreement was made and the land was transferred to the Feds, the Feds, in turn, sold it to the Railways, who may have sold parts to an entrepreneur who then had the land surveyed and subdivided and advertised it to population centres in the south with the typical hype.
There was a two year interval between the agreement being made regarding IR#1 vacation (except for the graveyard location) and the actual move to two new IRs. It was when some of the inhabitants decided not to move, that the Federal Government Agent decided to burn a couple of buildings down to push them out of the property they agreed to vacate.
Some money was paid when the agreement was signed, some after the move was made, and some may still exist to date in the form of a perpetual annuity.
We should also realize that the Lheidli T’enneh has some history about all this that is very benign. Also, there is a more aggressive faction that has their version of what happened at the burning. Then we have the opinion of University level research scholars from both European and Native ancestry.
Because of the rebranding, the Truth and Reconciliation activities which the City appears to be shunning by their activities so far, and even the absence of the local Catholic Church in that effort, and certainly because of the amount of gossip displayed by most of the general public about the history, we need someone to take control of this to enlighten the locals so that when we place a plaque in the park at some time in the future, it is not Murray Krause’s false words which will be written on it.
The final version needs to be vetted by organizations such as the Royal BC Museum and Library and Archives Canada.
BTW, Father Coccola who promoted the move became the first Rector of the infamous Lejac Indian Residential School.
From the above linked news article on why Seattle Mayor and Council voted unanimously to change Columbus Day to Indigenous Peoples Day:
“This is about taking a stand against racism and discrimination,” Seattle City Council member Kshama Sawant told the Seattle Times. “Learning about the history of Columbus and transforming this day into a celebration of indigenous people and a celebration of social justice … allows us to make a connection between this painful history and the ongoing marginalization, discrimination and poverty that indigenous communities face to this day.”
Thank you Mayor Lyn Hall and City Council for taking that bold stand against racism and discrimination by renaming the park to Lheidli T’enneh Memorial Park.
Sophic Sage…that was some pretty fancy foot work, taking the renaming of a park and making it into some kind of stand against racism and discrimination. The issue is not about “racism” and “discrimination”. But all to do with making a dumb decision without any logical and historical merit.
gopg2015…Quote”BTW, Father Coccola who promoted the move became the first Rector of the infamous Lejac Indian Residential School.” Unquote
What’s that got to do with the subject at hand?
I think a City Mayor and Council renaming a Federal Holiday from Columbus Day to Indigenous Peoples Day is a bigger change than the renaming of a park. Read through the article, and no where did I see Seattle Mayor and Council holding public discussions about the proposed name change, they just made the change unanimously.
Are there racist and discriminatory people in Seattle that oppose the name change of their Federal Holiday? No doubt about it, just like there are a minority of people here who oppose the renaming of a local park.
This Mayor and Council is doing a great number of many other things that will change Prince George for the better, as per Mayor Lyn Halls interview above. To get hung up on the renaming of one city park is petty, vindictive, and small minded, IMO.
Sage, you really are having a tough time comprehending the issue aren’t you.
Rename all the federal holidays that you want, no one cares, but don’t take a beloved local park that has been paid and lovingly cared for with citizen’s tax dollars, then obliterate it’s history so it can be used as a pawn in a scramble to curry favour with one part of the population in order to reap some sort of gain. I think the renaming of the park was extremely disingenuous and I’m wondering just what the real deal is. All the crap about reconciliation is just subterfuge. IMHO
Sophic Sage…Just because a Mayor and Council in Seattle made such a decision, doesn’t mean they made the correct one. So to compare what Seattle does to what we do has no merit, it’s not even in the equation. We need leadership in Prince George that doesn’t copy what others do, but rather comes up with logical solutions to our relevant situations. The majority of the citizens in Prince George are against the renaming of the park. This is not a small issue as you suggest; rooted in “petty” “vindictive” “small minds”, which you judge the majority of Prince George citizens.
Yeah right Cheetos, you can assume your minority represents a majority of Prince George citizens if that makes you feel better and not so alone on this subject.
Nice to see some “open minded” city Mayors and Council members like Prince George and Seattle showing some respect for a people; whose land we took over, and who face ongoing marginalization, discrimination, and poverty to this day.
History will recognize these renaming events as positive, and respectful, events that acknowledge the First Peoples of this land. I am proud of our Mayor and Council, they did the “right” thing here!
Seattle is the anglicized version of Chief Si’ahl after whom the city was named.
When we name Prince George after the local Chief at the time Prince George was incorporated, THEN we will have done after the fact what Seattle did from the beginning.
Of course, we named our country, some provinces, as well as many cities, counties, landmarks based on aboriginal words or people.
If anyone wants to get a bit closer to the history of the area try the Winter Games site.
lheidli2015.ca/our-history/historical-timeline.php
lheidli2015.ca/our-history/index.php
There is no credit given to the researcher(s)
joanholmes has some excellent research on reserve surrenders as well as the indian act intent
joanholmes.ca/Reserve%20Surrender%20Research%20Paper.pdf
I find the information most people present as “fact” in our neck of the woods appalling.
I find the lack of information about next steps in the local Truth and Reconciliation process from City Hall appalling. They have not scratched the surface yet.
————————
I also do not agree with the reversal of a more than two decade old best practice of having a member of the community chair Committees of Council. That implies more control of City matters by Council rather than community citizens. Yes, there should be a Councillor on the committees, but as a resource person and liaison, not as a chair. To me, it sends the wrong message.
The high level of the “matter at hand” is “Truth and Reconciliation”. The rebranding of a park is simply one of the small strategies of reconciliation.
trc.ca/websites/trcinstitution/index.php?p=3
In this round it is focused on the Residential Schools run primarily by Catholic missionaries fulfilling the mandate supported by the Feds to take the “Indian” out of the Indian, or the savage out of the savage.
In Canada, the Catholic Church has been included in that process. Some, like the Bishop of St. Albert’s have been participating, in others, like PG, the Bishop has not.
It deals a lot with how Aboriginals were treated in the past, as well as how they are treated now. The flying of an Aboriginal flag at the seat of Local Government alongside the Canadian, Provincial and Municipal flags provides them with the recognition that they are part of the governance regime.
The rebranding of the Park and the flying of the flag as an acknowledgement of another level of “governance” within the City limits does very little to address the bigger picture.
When one reads a bit more of some of the thoughts of the day, rather than the thought by today’s people some 100 years removed, one can read that Fr. Cocolla wanted to save his flock from the decadence of the town with its alcohol and sinners by moving them away from the town-to-be. He used his influence to make that happen after 2 failed attempts to get the band to agree on the move.
He was the sheepherder and the local band was the herd. And when the young were sent to Lejac, he also sheared their hair.
The simple way to describe it is brainwashing. I think the UN has something to say about that today.
Sophic Sage….A local paper in town did a survey among the citizens of Prince George and at least 52% canvassed disagreed with the name change. So I don’t feel so alone.
gopg2015…The Governance of Prince George is one elected by the people. That is our way of Governance, be it Civic, Provincial or Federal. Anything else is not Governance, is not Democratic and is not Canadian. Also the City of Prince George is not responsible for the sins of the R.C. Church.
Cheetos; you must be referring to the Prince George Citizen poll, the one where just a handful of people can vote over and over again by simply clearing their web browser history.
The essence of democracy is majority rule, the making of binding decisions by a vote of more than one-half of all persons who participate in an election. However, constitutional democracy in our time requires majority rule with minority rights. Thomas Jefferson, third President of the United States, expressed this concept of democracy in 1801 in his First Inaugural Address. He said,
“All . . . will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect and to violate would be oppression.”
In every genuine democracy today, majority rule is both endorsed and limited by the supreme law of the constitution, which protects the rights of individuals. Tyranny by minority over the majority is barred, but so is tyranny of the majority against minorities. ~ Annenberg Classroom Resources for Excellent Civics Education
Who are the minorities in this case? The Lheidli Tenneh People.
The on-line Anneberg Classroom it is one of the best sources for civics education in the world. Hope you spend some time there learning about what true democracy is all about Cheetos.
Sophic Sage…thanks for the lesson in democracy, but I don’t know why you brought up the subject. You make it sound that the Lheidli Tenneh People, were an oppressed people, the answer is not. The Lheidle Tenneh are a “band” among the Carrier nation. The name “Lheidle Tenneh” means people of the confluence. In this case where the Fraser and Nechako Rivers meet. The group of Carrier decided to form a “band” by the Fraser and called themselves “Lheidle Tenneh.” The band was offered money for their land, of which they accepted. Not only that but some new land and some new houses. So the “Band” of Carrier fared well. It’s no different when the Government wants to run a new highway through some farmers land, and the farmer is compensated for that land. I was born and raised in PG and currently reside in this city. I am quickly approaching 60 years. I have been educated with natives, many are my friends. I just don’t see any major problems with racism against our first nation friends. Mayor and Council have made a non issue an issue with their decision. Up until now we lived together in peace and harmony. This issue of renaming the Park has upset the waters in this community and council needs to revisit this issue. Have a good evening Sophic Sage. :)
The high level of the “matter at hand” is “Truth and Reconciliation”. The rebranding of a park is simply one of the small strategies of reconciliation.
trc.ca/websites/trcinstitution/index.php?p=3
In this round it is focused on the Residential Schools run primarily by Catholic missionaries fulfilling the mandate supported by the Feds to take the “Indian” out of the Indian, or the savage out of the savage.
In Canada, the Catholic Church has been included in that process. Some, like the Bishop of St. Albert’s have been participating, in others, like PG, the Bishop has not.
It deals a lot with how Aboriginals were treated in the past, as well as how they are treated now. The flying of an Aboriginal flag at the seat of Local Government alongside the Canadian, Provincial and Municipal flags provides them with the recognition that they are part of the governance regime.
The rebranding of the Park and the flying of the flag as an acknowledgement of another level of “governance” within the City limits does very little to address the bigger picture.
When one reads a bit more of some of the thoughts of the day, rather than the thought by today’s people some 100 years removed, one can read that Fr. Cocolla wanted to save his flock from the decadence of the town with its alcohol and sinners by moving them away from the town-to-be. He used his influence to make that happen after 2 failed attempts to get the band to agree on the move.
He was the sheepherder and the local band was the herd. And when the young were sent to Lejac, he also sheared their hair.
The Governance of Prince George is one elected by the people.
Right!
That is our way of Governance, be it Civic, Provincial or Federal.
Right!
Those we elect govern us.
Those we have elected federally have decided that it is time to atone for the transgression of the past governments, be it federal, provincial or municipal by going through a Truth and Reconciliation process.
In the case of residential schools, which is what this is primarily about, those of Catholic Faith were especially involved in what we would call today a partnership of sorts.
I realize that Collective Guilt is not something most Canadians understand, other than those who emigrated from some other countries. The term Truth and Reconciliation is one mostly associated with South Arica which went through that process in a very serious way when the European led British, Dutch and German occupiers of the land were replaced by the indigenous African groups.
Also the City of Prince George is not responsible for the sins of the R.C. Church.
True. But the Archdiocese of Prince Rupert still owns a lot of land in PG, has a Bishop in BC, as well as several Catholic Churches and. Fr. Coccola was a Catholic priest who had a parish in the region of the City. Some of the same people who voted in the governments of the municipality when it became one, the provincial representatives in Victoria and federal representatives in Ottawa, were also those who went to church, herd the sermons from the pulpit and supported the Church which was complicit in forcibly removing children from their homes, beating them, sexually assaulting them, and brainwashing them about the heathen culture they grew up in.
Life experiences, life governance, interracial living is all integrated and can actually not be separated into nice clean little silos which maintain an ignorant, guiltless status quo. Eventually it hits us. And it is finally hitting some now.
In my opinion, it has not hit City Council yet, it has not hit Murray Krause yet, based on his presentation to Council and it has not hit you and likely a majority of others yet. Only time can do that.
rcav.org/trc
The Mayor and Council have done some good work since they were elected and they have a long way to go. Hopefully they will delve into the high cost of running this City with a view of reducing costs. Hopefully they will come up with a long term plan to deal with infrastructure etc; They need to start to deal with these issues on their own, rather than stand around with hat in hand waiting for the Feds or the Province to put some money in the hat. There is plenty we can do on our own and the sooner we get started the better.
As for the name changing issue. It goes without saying that this Council blew this issue. Seems they got caught up in the hyperbole of Councilor Krause, and none of them did their homework.
The citizens of Prince George at the very least should have been able to debate this issue. The Lheidli Tenneh should have been part of the debate. The idea that Councillor Krause is some sort of expert on this issue, or that he represents the Lheidli Tenneh or for that matter the majority of people in Prince George is bogus. Krause is just one citizen and one vote,. Basically he made an end run on Council, and at the end of the day, has nothing to be proud of.
Comments for this article are closed.