- - - - - - - Langley Free Press Welcomes Your Comments - - - - - - - - - Name Email URL is optional
Welcome to the blog world, Susan! After reading the nasty comments posted on the other blog, I just wanted to tell you how much I have been enjoying your reports and your perspective on things. I don't think too much of people who hide behind anonymous labels and nit pick about spelling and grammar. On the plus side though, if you're getting such small-minded comments like that, you know you're making an impact. So good job and keep up the great work! Your voice is important as are the issues and concerns you raise.
Re: Trustee Sonya Paterson, 'infer that her kettle has no water and is burning its bottom' by Susan! luv this analogy, never heard it before!
Rest assured, Susan. Few people take as fact, the spin that those with "power" put on your numbers. They did not produce them, so how can they be right? LOL! Where have I heard that before, local government, provincial government, federal government? Same tune, different band. Even if your figure was $10,000, that is enough to convince me that you are right. Keep up the great work. I enjoy your reports. My son will be in the school system for the next seven years, so this matters to me. Thanks.
This Editor agrees with the Murray. Be it $16k or $25K the point Susan makes is as this editor reads it, is that Langley City gets no direct representation or value by these two seats. Remove them and give the money back to the school kids directly. The Trustee should be addressing this bigger issue and this real issue. Or is it possible that the burning bottom is the trustee's real issue or is it perhaps that their compensation is only $16k?
The following was from Susan's last report and she was right that no one would even notice. That is frightening to me. Without public scrutiny, much will be allowed unfettered until it it too late. I agree with her suspicions and think that this will give them carte blanche to do with their assets as they see fit without much contest.
SCAARY.... Who will do the value assesment? How will we know that it a deal will be good ((profitable for the students)
"(j) POLICY #3601 – DISPOSAL OF REAL PROPERTY "Recommendation: That Notice of Motion to introduce new Policy #3601 – Disposal of Real Property
From my perspective (and I could be wrong because it wasn’t exactly well explained at the meeting), this new policy appears to allow for a variety of behind the scenes deals to sell or swap property without going through a full public tender or public bidding process. I can guess this is so that they can quickly dispose of land since the Fundamental expansion bill is due and over budget. How much do you want to wager that very few people will object?
Commenting by HaloScan
