A Heads Up To Those Who Claim Fear When Someone Raises Their Voice

There’s been a lot of this crap going on lately.  Now we have a precedent.

People claiming to be afraid when someone raises their voice and wanting protection and special consideration.  Get a grip.  If you can’t handle the position – let someone who can.

“A protest does not cease to be peaceful simply because protesters are loud and angry,” the Appeal Court said. “Political protesters can be subject to restrictions to prevent them from disrupting others, but they are not required to limit their upset in order to engage their constitutional right to engage in protest.”


“Violence is not the mere absence of civility.”




Kensington Island Properties – The Ever Shrinking Development

The following map shows the original coal hill area which KIP promised would be remediated according to owner Jim Youngren by late 2016.

The area I have darkened is the portion the province took back from KIP as it is supposedly contaminated.  So the original contaminated coal hill area and a portion of contaminated KIP land is now in the hands of the province.  KIP has walked away.

There is a proposed right of way opposite Jones Street for access to the coal hill area through KIP’s property.


This is the map I posted previously showing the entire coal hill area.  KIP won’t have much land left considering the amount of erosion along the entire area.

Union Bay Improvement District Board and Administrator Do Not Understand Copyright Regarding Videos of Public Meetings

No word yet on the Board’s attempt to prevent the public from recording PUBLIC MEETINGS.  The amount of time they have wasted on this issue is amusing.  After all the huffing and puffing by one uninformed trustee and the limited knowledge of copyright with the intention to post the videos on Youtube, perhaps they need to read the terms anyone posting videos on Youtube MUST AGREE TO.

This uninformed trustee latches on to a comment made by the woman who conducted the orientation and has built upon the idea of copyright without any research and arrived at the mistaken conclusion of what constitutes copyright material.  No sign this trustee will change their uninformed ways and false statements.

The highlighted portion:

You also hereby grant each user of the Service a non-exclusive license to access your Content through the Service, and to use, reproduce, distribute, display and perform such Content as permitted through the functionality of the Service and under these Terms of Service.

Regarding copyright:

a work must be both creative and fixed in a tangible medium.

A public meeting is not creative – it is a public meeting.

I posted a short clip of The Daily Show with Trevor Noah on Youtube to see what would happen and I received the following:


6. Your Content and Conduct

  1. As a YouTube account holder you may submit Content to the Service, including videos and user comments. You understand that YouTube does not guarantee any confidentiality with respect to any Content you submit.
  2. You shall be solely responsible for your own Content and the consequences of submitting and publishing your Content on the Service. You affirm, represent, and warrant that you own or have the necessary licenses, rights, consents, and permissions to publish Content you submit; and you license to YouTube all patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright or other proprietary rights in and to such Content for publication on the Service pursuant to these Terms of Service.
  3. For clarity, you retain all of your ownership rights in your Content. However, by submitting Content to YouTube, you hereby grant YouTube a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the Content in connection with the Service and YouTube’s (and its successors’ and affiliates’) business, including without limitation for promoting and redistributing part or all of the Service (and derivative works thereof) in any media formats and through any media channels. You also hereby grant each user of the Service a non-exclusive license to access your Content through the Service, and to use, reproduce, distribute, display and perform such Content as permitted through the functionality of the Service and under these Terms of Service. The above licenses granted by you in video Content you submit to the Service terminate within a commercially reasonable time after you remove or delete your videos from the Service. You understand and agree, however, that YouTube may retain, but not display, distribute, or perform, server copies of your videos that have been removed or deleted. The above licenses granted by you in user comments you submit are perpetual and irrevocable.


What is Copyright?

In many jurisdictions, when a person creates an original work that is fixed in a physical medium, he or she generally automatically owns copyright to the work. The owner has the exclusive right to use the work in certain, specific ways.

Which types of work are subject to copyright?
  • Audiovisual works, such as TV shows, movies, and online videos
  • Sound recordings and musical compositions
  • Written works, such as lectures, articles, books, and musical compositions
  • Visual works, such as paintings, posters, and advertisements
  • Video games and computer software
  • Dramatic works, such as plays and musicals

Ideas, facts, and processes are not subject to copyright. In order to be eligible for copyright protection, a work must be both creative and fixed in a tangible medium. Names and titles are not, by themselves, subject to copyright.

If you have copyright material to protect:

8. Digital Millennium Copyright Act

  1. If you are a copyright owner or an agent thereof and believe that any Content infringes upon your copyrights, you may submit a notification pursuant to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”) by providing our Copyright Agent with the following information in writing (see 17 U.S.C 512(c)(3) for further detail):
    • A physical or electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed;
    • Identification of the copyrighted work claimed to have been infringed, or, if multiple copyrighted works at a single online site are covered by a single notification, a representative list of such works at that site;
    • Identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed or access to which is to be disabled and information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to locate the material;
    • Information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact you, such as an address, telephone number, and, if available, an electronic mail;
    • A statement that you have a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law; and
    • A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that you are authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.

Kensington Island Properties VP Brian McMahon Stated Coal Hills Area “A cesspool of contaminants” – Now Abandoned Area

2009 Kensington’s top priority – this guy should be a comedian – he’s a real hoot.

I can hardly wait to hear his version of why he walked away from the coal hills area that is contaminated.  Word has it the province now has taken back that area as well as a small portion of KIP land that was considered contaminated.

The only thing KIP has produced over the last 21 years (since 1996) is a large pile of bullshit leading simpletons who are willfully ignorant in supporting this blowhard.

Union Bay Improvement District – No Progress in a Year

This is the stage Union Bay was at in March 2016.  Obviously, the previous board and Administrator were on target to meet the Island Health deadline.  Jacques and Loxam along with David Godfrey and their petition demanding UBID give KIP an extension on the expired 2011 Water Infrastructure Agreement threw a wrench in the works.

We have a KIP heavy board and an Administrator who has zero government experience with a chip on his shoulder.  When can we expect the same professionalism displayed by the Improvement District Board and Administrator prior to the April 2016 election?

What happened to all the promises by the pro KIP trustees?  Claimed the previous board was taking the community in a direction they didn’t want to go.  So where are we with the new direction promised by Jacques and Loxam with Bitten getting on board in Oct. 2016?

Announced an agreement with KIP at the July 27, 2017 meeting even though McMahon hadn’t signed anything due to a family emergency.  So what’s the hold up now – McMahon’s got a hundred more excuses.

Same old same old.


Another Failure for Kensington Island Properties aka 34083 Yukon Inc.

Heard KIP has walked away from the section of the coal hill below with the exclamation mark consisting of 28 acres.  Map below is from iMap at the CVRD website.

All the talk – empty promises for years.  McMahon claimed KIP budgeted for the remediation.  Cost was said to be $18 Million.  So what will the plan be now?  Build a club house next to the contaminated site?

All the hillbillies celebrating the non announcement at the last UBID meeting claiming a deal had been struck with KIP for the permanent water treatment facility.  McMahon had a family emergency so he hadn’t signed the agreement yet.  Well, no surprise, he still hasn’t signed it.

This developer is not going to be constructing any homes any time in the near future as he must have both water and a sewage treatment system before he can build any homes.  I don’t believe this developer has the funds to start this project.  Like the Regional District stated – nothing has been done in twenty years since KIP took over the 800 plus acres.

This is also the piece of land which KIP claimed was holding up the installation of the water treatment facility according to the 2011 Water Infrastructure Agreement.  Claimed KIP couldn’t proceed until the remediation was agreed upon.  KIP claimed he was given the go ahead in the fall of 2014 – so how come KIP is walking away after the bull from the KIP March 2016 meeting about a “prescription” for the remediation?  Just another big wind bag.

I don’t believe anything this developer states about this lousy development.