The Rule of Law?

When the richest people control government it is called a plutocracy; when the crooks are in charge it is a kleptocracy. What can we call government by lawsuit?

We know perfectly well from unhappy experience that the Vision majority on City Council and Parks Board don’t listen to the people, no matter how many of us speak against their projects at public hearings, or sign petitions, or write them letters.  However, even Vision has to listen to judges as the successful lawsuits launched against the Hadden Park bike lane and the Rental100 giveaway to developers proved.

Understanding that this Council majority is unmoved by public outrage at their activities, and pleased with the results of these last two legal cases, a whole raft of suits has now been launched against Vision policies:

Glen Chernen and the Cedar Party have launched at least three suits — about the relationship between Hootsuite and Gregor Robertson, about the too-close ties between Vision and various media groups, and about park land pricing at Oakridge.  Meanwhile, the Residents Association of Mount Pleasant has launched a suit for what they claim is an illegal change in protected view cones, and I expect them soon to issue another suit against zoning practices in their neighbourhood.  Finally, Southlands Residents have gone to law regarding the rezoning of Casa Mia.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see plenty more of legal activity in the months ahead.

Most people consider the rule of law to be a good thing.  Unfortunately, in the case of the City of Vancouver, one has to wonder. Especially as you and I and all the other taxpayers of Vancouver have to foot the bill just because of Vision’s majority refusal to listen to citizens until they are forced.  We are all the worse off for their intransigent attitudes.

One Response to The Rule of Law?

  1. Bruce Macdonald says:

    This whole discussion reminds me of how I was aware of the 22 or so ‘view cones’ legislated to protect the views north from a neighbourhood deliberately called “Fairview” circa 1886.

    “Grandview” was so-called for the same obvious reasons.

    I pointed out many times in pubic forums – so-called public ‘input’ – that Grandview has 0 view cones in place and needed a number to protect the only remaining views from Grandview of the downtown skyline (from Grandview Park and Britannia Community Centre), the response was a mysterious silence.

    The current view from Grandview Park and Britannia Community Centre needs protecting – again, this was the entire reason why the area was called Grandview.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: