All Bear Mountain's Lawsuits

It just ain't fair. A loser scandal-rag like WTF Langford? commits every conceivable outrage on the interwebs and skates away scot-free, while good upstanding resort developers like Len Barrie and his pals get their pants sued off by everyone in town, plus a bunch more in Nanaimo and Vancouver.

While there are exactly ZERO lawsuits pending against critics of Stew Young and Bear Mountain (despite the public threats), the mills of justice are set to grind over Mr. Barrie and company from at least ten different directions.

CHAPPLE, Dallas versus LGB9 DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
Supreme Court (Civil) Victoria Law Courts 090461
February 3, 2009

KIM, Ho versus SPROULE, Dale
BEAR MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT HOLDINGS LTD.
Supreme Court (Civil ) Victoria Law Courts, 090940
March 4, 2009

CHORNEY, Brian versus BEAR MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT HOLDINGS LTD. FORMERLY KNOWN AS LGB9 DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AS BARE TRUSTEE FOR BEAR
MOUNTAIN MASTER PARTNERSHIP
March 4, 2009 (details unavailable)

DESERT TELEVISION MEDIA GROUP INC. versus BEAR MOUNTAIN MASTER PARTNERSHIP
Small Claims, Victoria Law Courts, 090233
March 9, 2009

WESTECK WINDOWS MFG. INC. versus BARRIE, Leonard
BEAR MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT HOLDINGS LTD.
Supreme Court (Civil) Vancouver Law Courts, 091944
March 13, 2009

BEAR MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT HOLDINGS LTD. versus RAMSEY PAINTING LTD.
Supreme Court (Civil) Victoria Law Courts, 091324
March 26, 2009

CANADIAN WESTERN BANK versus BEAR MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT HOLDINGS LTD.
Supreme Court Enforcement Proceedings, Victoria Law Courts, 091387
March 31, 2009

ROYAL BANK OF CANADA versus 18 ON 18 DEVELOPMENTS LTD.
BEAR MOUNTAIN MASTER PARTNERSHIP
Supreme Court (Civil) Vancouver Law Courts, 092686
April 8, 2009

KOKANEE MORTGAGE MIC LTD. versus SIMONS, Catherine
BEAR MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT HOLDINGS LTD.
Supreme Court (Foreclosure) Nanaimo Law Courts, 56277
April 17, 2009

COOPER, Christine versus BEAR MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT HOLDINGS LTD.
Supreme Court (Civil) Prince George Law Courts, 0934470
April 30, 2009

RAMSAY PAINTING LTD. versus BEAR MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT HOLDINGS LTD. FORMERLY KNOWN AS LGB9 DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
Supreme Court (Civil) Victoria Law Courts, 092076
May 12, 2009

When we have time, we'll post an update on the lawsuits from last year....

Told ya so

Vote count for Juan de Fuca:

• John Horgan, NDP - 11008 - 57.10%
• Jody Twa, Liberal - 6624 - 34.36%

So, what have we learned from this provincial election here in Langford?

- Big money doesn't always win the race.
- Stew Young is not a king-maker.
- Jody Twa is unemployed.

Special thanks to our expert WTF? political panel for pointing out that provincial ballots are counted by hand, not by Diebold machines.

Dear Anonymous: Since you ask...

Anonymous writes:

"the residents of Langford love their Mayor and Council, how else do you explain 6 terms for Stew Young and the overwhelming results for the Council in the last election, hello?"

Well, Anonymous, apparently a whole lot of people really don't love their Mayor and Council, and we've had so many "hot tips" in response to this question, it's like a dozen family-size cans of worms got upended in the WTF? inbox all at once. We had to call in the WTF? strategic response team to investigate this slimy mess. Let's just say we have some questions about the last municipal election.

Inquiring minds want to know:

- Despite Langford's population growth, extra polling booths and long long lineups on voting day, the official tally says the total number of votes was the same as the last election. Surprise! Could it be that hundreds - or even thousands - of votes were never counted?

- Did the chief electoral officer actually make the opposition's scrutineers leave before the election tally was finished? If so, why?

- Were the ballot boxes, in fact, left unsecured at City Hall after the advance polls, and left unsealed as the scrutineers were hustled out the door?

- Were the Diebold vote-counting machines rigged to lose votes? (Vote-rigging has been reported elsewhere.)

Yes, this mayor and council are still seated at City Hall, despite their apparent unpopularity. Strange rumours indeed! But it seems none of the challengers filed a complaint, so what ya gonna do?

WTF Langford? welcomes your questions, comments, love letters, hate mail, threats, etc. Don't be shy!

Langford's Fudge-it Budget

The 2009 budget comes up for approval at a special council meeting on Monday, May 11.

Check it out -- $50.966 million from "Other Sources"? Damn! That's 60% of the budget!

Inside Langford reports: "The five year plan is interesting as it seems to have budgeted the assumption of receiving several grants,* an apparently unusual accounting technique (the more common technique appears to be to adjust your five-year plan after receiving a grant, than budgeting as if you were going to receive it when you don’t know whether you will or not)."

And don't worry about asking questions about the budget -- there's no public participation on the agenda for this meeting.

Update: The budget was passed without a single comment. So there.

Updated update: $32 million in grants for the allegedly "private-funded" Bear Mountain Interchange were rejected, possibly because handing federal money to private companies is considered corrupt or something.

Straight from the horse's ass

Sean Holman from Public Eye captured this memorable moment with Liberal Juan de Fuca candidate Jody Twa, who apparently believes this election is sewed up so tight, no one even needs to bother voting!

"One of the things I thought when I took on this job was 'Is this riding winnable?' And I would not be standing here today if I did not absolutely believe this riding is winnable. And when I look out tonight and see how many people are here and I recognize so many. And I know how hard this community works - how hard the Westshore works - I've changed my opinion. This riding is going to be like a machine. If we build up to May 12, it's just going to be like a machine that gains momentum. And the day May 12 comes, the work will be done. They'll be no reason to even vote in this riding because we'll have worked so hard that we'll be elected." - Jody Twa, September 4, 2008.

Were they lying then, or are they lying now?

Who's lying - Bear Mountain Resort or the BC Liberal Party? New revelations and contradictions about Gordon Campbell's big expensive thingy last year at Len Barrie's mansion have tongues wagging across the West Shore. Sean Holman, Victoria's own Public Eye, has been reporting on the controversy since the story leaked out last year. Here's his latest report:

The Fundraiser That Wasn't There
May 08, 2009

Last year, Bear Mountain spokesperson Trish Lees told us a group of local businessmen organized a $10,000 per plate provincial Liberal fundraiser at resort developer and former National Hockey League player Len Barrie's residence. But the party's latest annual financial report - which is supposed to list all of its fundraisers - doesn't include any reference to that event. So why is that?

Well, because it wasn't actually a fundraiser, according to Liberal communications director Chad Pederson. "I've talked with our accounting staff and I've learned the function that you're referencing was, in fact, a thank you dinner for those that had made previous contributions for showing their support," he said, adding "there was no cost associated with (attending) the dinner."

So what about Ms. Lees's statement that there was? "The woman that you're referencing in your original story wasn't a representative of the party, she didn't have a role in the dinner's organization. So I don't know what she was referring to in her previous comment about that," Mr. Pederson responded.

Um, so - the Liberals decided they would wait until now to issue this clarification? Sure, that's believable!

Langford's Latest Land-Use F&#% Up

Actual illustration of the proposed "Urban Agricultural Urbanism Village" [sic]

In case anyone needed evidence that the land-use process in Langford has devolved into bizarre, unintentionally-hilarious lunacy, here's People's Exhibit #217: the Agricultural Advisory Committee.

Developers have turned their covetous eyes to the farmlands of the Happy Valley, where they foresee a future of subdivisions, cheap condos and mega-dollar signs. But farmland is protected by the provincial Agricultural Land Reserve, and there are lots of rules about taking farmland out of the reserve to build condos and other crap. (This is a good thing; otherwise we'd be importing all our food from Brazil.)

Because turning farmland into condos brings a fat windfall profit, the rules are very particular about making sure land-use decisions are fair and honest and accountable, in order to stop what prissy lawmakers in Victoria call "corruption and graft." But this is Langford, so HA! suckers.

First, Matthew Baldwin, the evil troll in charge of Langford's planning department, tried to reject citizens' letters about keeping farmland in the reserve. When confronted, Baldwin grudgingly admitted that yes, Langford does have a decision-making process of sorts, and perhaps people should be allowed to comment. That's all -- no apology, no making amends to the people he told to f$@# off. At any rate, Langford got about 70 letters about the farmland - 69 in favour of keeping it in the reserve. (Although some of those letters were "lost" and never made it to the public hearing. Oops!)

Then, alert council-watchers noticed a new agricultural advisory committee member sitting at the table and voting on the applications. Oddly enough, this advisor had the same last name and first initial as the owner of the parcel under consideration. Oh, um, strange coincidence?

Ha! No! Mr. Thomas Atherton, member of the advisory committee, just happens to own that parcel of land on Happy Valley Road. And yes, he voted to forward his own application to the province. And YES, Mayor Stew Young and Langford council know all this! And OF COURSE they think it's JUST FINE!

Are you done laughing yet? Because that's not the punchline. Langford's rules about the advisory committee state:

The membership of the Committee shall maintain strict confidentiality, particularly with respect to individual applications for ALR exclusion, and no member of the Agriculture Advisory Committee shall have an active application before the committee. (Emphasis in original.)

OK -- still laughing? Last point: AFTER Atherton's conflict was pointed out at the public hearing, council STILL went ahead and voted to recommend the applications to the Agricultural Land Commission. Unfortunately for them, this application is headed straight for the round file. Why? Last month, a BC Supreme Court judge threw out a land-use decision because one of the land commissioners voted on an application about his neighbour's property. The judge gave the commission a very public spanking to teach them a lesson about conflict of interest.

So, anyone want to bet the commission will decide to turn a blind eye to this latest conflict of interest? Ha ha! We didn't think so!

Seriously, people - WTF will Langford do next? We don't know either! Stay tuned!