Strong opposition to the project? I don't think so. Strong opposition is in Pakistan. Now that's opposition people understand.

I imagine the Mayor and the majority of Council read this blog, particularly on this issue.

I hope they do the right thing by looking beyond the rhetoric of the NIMBY Army, and approving this re-zoning application in favour of the greater public good.

This is a sound proposal for an entirely appropriate site - it's quality housing (not shelter) for a relatively disadvantaged subset of the Prince George population.

If we view ourselves in any way as a 'community' we should get behind this proposal 100%.

Agree with you Moses. May spur more development on this area of Queensway.

Yah, so what if the area that gets a letter is just 30 meters. If 30 meters around that rubby-dub business becomes unusable and turns into a wasteland, is that OK?

I'm also wondering why 30 meter was picked as the number for notification? The DFO recommended 30 meter set back for stream side habitat protection, so I'm just curious why the city slapped on an extra 20 meters to make it 50 meter habitat protection for fish, but only 30 meters buffer for people?? So nature and fish need protection and buffer zones, but people - aw pile them up into one stinking heap.

I don't remember Ben and the 250 staff doing a survey at the meeting regarding the Transitional housing project.

I guess that they must have done such a survey since they make the following statement in their news item:

"The move to re zone the property has brought out strong opposition to the project with about 240 residents of the city recently turning out to protest the project."

Is it really true that all 240 people who turned out to the meeting protested the project?

The statement must be true....since I read it in the Opinion 250 press.

'I don't remember Ben and the 250 staff doing a survey at the meeting regarding the Transitional housing project.'

That's because Ben was too busy preaching from his personal pulpit on the subject.

Pretty responsible journalism when the editor, no less, of a news outlet vents his personal views, leaves a few seconds later, then 'reports' that '240 residents of the city recently turning out to protest the project.'

There were a number of people there in support of the project, including residents of the immediate area.

The Phil Donahue facilitation of the meeting (giving the floor to the most rabid, hand waving objector) certainly didn't help those supporters get their message across.

Looks like the supporters of this little dose of neighbourhood toxin are trying to rewrite the news as well.

Seems they don't mind doing what they accuse Opinion 250 of doing. HeeHee!

Moses, you have got to be kidding, right?

The time of day is more important than the opinions expressed on this site. I don`t think that the regulars collectively on 250 could keep a boat afloat.

Dear Moses.
Just so you know, Ben did not write the story on the events of that evening, I did.
As for the "survey", the statement comes from the fact that of those in attendance, most signed a petition before entering, and declared they were NOT confused about what they were sigining when one person in attendance said she thought having a petition outdoors was confusing to those entering the building.

By the way, Ben has every right to express an opinion, just as we offer you the opportunity to express yours.

Elaine Macdonald
Publisher

Doesn't a name like "Opinion 250" imply that the operators of the site may, in fact, be expressing their opinions? Take it for what it is.

The sidebar on the home page reads: 'We (Opinion 250) are the fastest growing news medium in BC'

So which is it?

Journalism and balanced reporting (news) or op-ed and commentary (opinion)?

Rule No. 1 (of course) is 'don't believe everything you read'.

Rule No. 2 must be 'don't pretend to be a 'news' source when you're clearly not providing balance to your stories.'

I guess Moses will have to find a news source more to it's liking. Try CBC, they'll support anything and never say a bad word doing it, unless it is a story about capitalist pigs or conservatives. HeeHee!

Moses, where do you live ,where have you been ?? This has nothing to do with NIMBY. We as a Neighbourhood have a right to be heard but probably wont't be because people like you who do not know the facts and what our neighbourhood has already had to be dealing with will be the ones heard. The Downtown is a mess and now that mess will be put around children. Don't you people care??Pedophiles and who knows who from who knows where with who knows what are going to be around schools and children but as long as its NIMBY. I keep asking but nobody can answer how many people who frequent the homeless shelter downtown are from Prince George or are we bringing them from other places and is this what will be going on with the backpacker project??This project is a lot more than quality housing and we should be stopping this project from going into a residential area. I hope the Mayor and council read this blog, and I hope they listen to the people in the area that's going to be affected by this project and remember they also represent us.

Norm1, How many people attended the "Backstabber" project meeting at Ron Brent School isn't the Issue. The meeting was for the people living in the area to voice their concerns but they were not able to because the meeting was set up to include people in favor of the project, some for personal reasons and they hardly gave the residents in the area a chance to speak. A proper Microphone system would have helped. On wonders if this was not done on purpose. I hope you noticed the seniors in the crowd who have lived in the area for a life time and whose lives could be greatly affected by this project and if you do not live in our area what were you doing at our meeting? We asked Ben to come to the meeting and thank him for coming. Ben, we hope you will be at the Council Meeting as you are the only in the political arena that has given a honest point of view.