Posted in CVRD, Government, Kensington Coastal Pointe, Kensington Island Properties aka KIP Costanza, 34083 Yukon Inc., Kensington Union Bay Properties Gp Ltd, Kensington Union Bay Properties Ltd., The Union Bay Community, Union Bay Estates, Union Bay Resorts

Kensington Island Properties aka Union Bay Estates Never Wanted Bylaw 264 – KIP’s Flunkies Claimed the MMCD Standards “…could prove financially onerous to developers…” Check out the “strata” subdivision.

Previous posts about Bylaw 264 and the dirty tricks pulled to ensure it never would never be implemented. The Ministry worried about what KIP objected to; the withholding of the legal opinion for months by the UBID admin and trustees and only advising Trustee Kaljur the day they voted to kill the bylaw in Oct. https://allthingsunionbay.com/?s=Bylaw+264

Strata timeshare – excerpt from FOI MOE-2020-00764

This email is a continuation of this post: https://allthingsunionbay.com/2021/07/14/more-proof-of-bullshit-spewed-by-kensington-island-properties-aka-union-bay-estates/

So does the infrastructure being installed that is not subject to CVRD approval meet the MMCD Standards? What’s the difference between the requirements/approval from CVRD to provincial?

This is a strata subdivision and most infrastructure will be privately owned and not subject to CVRD approval (rather, the provincial subdivision approving officer will just need to be satisfied that water and sewer are provided)

Then the individual sent this email:

This is the body of the email below with the size of the font increased so you can read it:

The CVRD continues to work closely with Union Bay Estates and their advisors to ensure that the infrastructure installed meets the requirements of the master development agreement. Regarding the water system the following has been provided/reviewed/ and/or is under design:

CDA 2 – approx. 40 lot subdivision north of Hart Creek.

·         This is a strata subdivision and most infrastructure will be privately owned and not subject to CVRD approval (rather, the provincial subdivision approving officer will just need to be satisfied that water and sewer are provided)

·         As a courtesy only, CVRD has reviewed the proposed strata water system and provided comments to Union Bay Estates’ engineering team relative to the requirements of the master development agreement

·         The CDA 2 strata water system has been installed – prior to issuing any building permits within that strata we will need to see confirmation from the Ministry of Health that the water system meets the Ministry’s requirements

·         The only public portion of the CDA 2 water system is that portion which will connect the strata system to the CVRD’s Union Bay water system. This is essentially two highway crossings along with valves and meters. Drawings for this portion of the system are being finalized by UBE and will be submitted to CVRD for review and approval. Installation of this portion of the system will occur only after CVRD approval.

·         All fire hydrants within CDA 2 will utilize potable water (this is a provincial requirement)

·         There is no reclaimed (purple pipe) water system within CDA 2

·         The MDA does not require a reclaimed water system

CDA 3 – discovery centre

·         The subdivision of CDA 3 for the discovery centre (which is proposed to include a sales centre) is also a strata subdivision and infrastructure will be privately owned and therefore not subject to CVRD approval

·         No infrastructure has been installed in this area

·         The CVRD understands that UBE plans to utilize reclaimed water within a purple pipe system to irrigate boulevards within this part of the strata development – those pipes will be owned by the strata

Regarding your specific questions below:

1.      As the CDA 2 strata water system will be privately owned. CVRD approval is not required. The CVRD will approve the connection of the strata system to the CVRDs Union Bay water system prior to the installation of that infrastructure.

2.      The fire distribution system will use potable water. The CVRD understands that some of the irrigation system (boulevards) may use reclaimed water. The MDA does not require the use of reclaimed water.  

Can they make the font any smaller and paler?

Posted in Kensington Coastal Pointe, Kensington Island Properties aka KIP Costanza, 34083 Yukon Inc., Kensington Union Bay Properties Ltd., The Union Bay Community, UBID, Union Bay Estates, Union Bay Resorts

Why Did Kensington Island Properties aka Union Bay Estates Need Bylaw 264 Killed?

Ole slick had lots of flunkies help kill Bylaw 264. Check out the link below to view the history and emails obtained through an FOI showing KIP’s Liberal buddies in the Ministry kowtowing to this developer. KIP’s sycophants. For those who may not be aware, this developer has strong ties to the Liberals, in fact his previous wife was an MLA and he ran and lost an election prior to darkening our doorstep.

This is an update to this post: https://allthingsunionbay.com/2019/07/11/kensington-island-properties-union-bay-estates-liberal-buddies-at-the-ministry-manipulate-bylaws-protecting-a-developer-instead-of-landowners/

Did anyone notice the new UBID board is once again looking at their subdivision bylaw? It appears the items listed in Bylaw 264 are to be addressed and then approved.

It started in March 2016 with then pro KIP candidates Peter Jacques and Glen Loxam prior to their election in April 2016.

At the same time the Ministry in charge of registering bylaws for the province also expressed concern over KIP’s objections to the bylaw. Weird eh?

One of the many emails in a response to a landowners FOI:

The Administrator for the Molstad board worked 2 years on updating a new subdivision bylaw and passed it in June 2016 after complying with the changes requested by the Ministry. For some reason the bylaw was never registered by the Ministry after UBID passed it.

The old subdivision bylaw 176 predates 2010 when it was consolidated https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RetkSslb0a0kiysRGAG6JuGRhhcT60Ny/view

Here’s the draft of Bylaw 264. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Vk4mbPBvD3p5jYdfppmCS2KnDT7zshVg/view?usp=sharing

The excerpt below is Jacques and Loxam objecting to the bylaw claiming it’s standards are too high and will cut developers off at the knees making it cost more to develop lots. Also the need for a 125% surety is disputed with claims someone at Crown Isle told Loxam didn’t have to put up anything. He should have just said “I don’t know a lot about it.” at the beginning so we could ignore the rest. These 2 are more concerned with the developer than the future of Union Bay.

For you folks in Craigdarroch, listen to the Chair explain why the board is ensuring developers are held to standards in the bylaw to ensure there isn’t another infrastructure problem like the disintegrating water pipes in Craigdarroch.

Kip’s sycophants were successful in killing bylaw 264 in Oct. 2017 – the exact same month the UBID board negotiated the 2017 Water Agreement with KIP – using the old bylaw 176. The same trustees complained about old bylaws and policies that would need to be updated – but not this one!

So what standards is Kensington Island Properties going to build by?

Posted in Conflict of Interest, Government, Hillbilly, Imitation board, Kensington Coastal Pointe, Kensington Island Properties aka KIP Costanza, 34083 Yukon Inc., The Union Bay Community, Union Bay Estates

Kensington Island Properties/Union Bay Estates Liberal buddies at the Ministry manipulate bylaws – protecting a developer instead of landowners.

NOTE: The legal opinion regarding Bylaw 264 was received July 12, 2017 from UBID’s lawyer and yet Trustee Kaljur stated she only received it Oct 12, 2017 – the day of the meeting. Another example of this Admin withholding documents from certain Trustees. It’s pretty obvious Kaljur was kept out of the loop since Bitten had his motion ready to kill Bylaw 264. KIP got his flunkies to keep that opinion secret so the new Water Agreement with KIP used the old Bylaw 176. KIP has been running the community since these tools were elected. Fire this Admin!!!

This is what an individual received from a Freedom of Information request regarding Union Bay Improvement District Bylaw 264. NOTE: it took two years to get this information. The first response was insufficient and the individual persisted and received this: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RetkSslb0a0kiysRGAG6JuGRhhcT60Ny/view It’s a dog’s breakfast so you are going to have to use those brain cells to understand what has transpired. This bylaw was worked on over a 2 year period by the professional Administrator we had (what a loss) because the previous bylaw was so old and out of date – bylaw 176 from 2004 consolidated to bylaw 227 in 2010. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RetkSslb0a0kiysRGAG6JuGRhhcT60Ny/view

The FOI has many duplicates and the emails are not always in order of date. It’s over 200 pages but it contains the bylaw and forms and regulations with emails every once in a while.

The Bylaw was approved by the board Chaired by Carol Molstad in March 2016. The Ministry wanted some changes and the Board approved it at the June 15, 2016 meeting. The Ministry failed to “register” it with the Inspector and kept stalling.

The following 2 pages have been extracted to show the Ministry wanted to know what concerns KIP had with a subdivision bylaw. WTF? Another example of the dirty backroom deals in favour of this sleazy developer by the Liberal Government – and those people are still there. Faganello, Mueller, etc. with their fingers on the scales in favour of KIP. Look at the bullet points for answers to be given when questions are asked.

“Jim” would be James Mattison, the facilitator appointed by Liberal Minister Fassbender before he was turfed. Why did the Ministry get involved when they claim they never interfere in local government? He was appointed because KIP threw a hissy fit when the honest board wouldn’t extend an expired agreement.

Then we have this page that mentions good ole Liberal Don McRae, a KIP buddy who refused to verify he attended the Nov. 2015 meeting with KIP, Jacques, Godfrey and Fassbender crying the blues. Look at the wording “Its mentioned there’s a building bylaw passed by UBID in late March 2016 and that its supposedly designed to severely limit potential development.” More sleaze from those who cater to this developer.

This is from the pro Kip candidates election flyer. Who do you think instructed them to claim there were problems with Bylaw 264? So in Mar. 2016 when the Ministry staff has been advised KIP has concerns over the bylaw – Loxam and Jacques speculate that “It is doubtful that his bylaw will be approved by the minister office, at least in it’s present form.” These two brainiacs didn’t come up with this on their own. They were just KIP flunkies.

Pages 3 and 4 from the June 15, 2016 board meeting https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LTnMk4-HTti0j9I4_HwMtaxv1M-cx_fK/view

So this is the board who claimed they were concerned over some of the bylaws and policies that were years old but instead of approving Bylaw 264 which had been worked on for 2 years, they used a bylaw that was from 2010 because KIP didn’t like the new bylaw. Pro KIP trustee Bitten put forth a motion to kill bylaw 264 to please a developer. We managed to remove 2 pro KIP trustees – two down – two to go. 🙂

Bylaw 264 discussed at the June 15, 2017 meeting. They agree to get a legal opinion on the bylaw. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1V1P6wUeXcMWsoI_wTxgiBcd4AvTKJFfz/view

Then at the Oct. 12, 2017 meeting Bylaw 264 is killed by the pro KIP trustees after receiving the legal opinion. Bitten claims the 12 points raised by UBID’s lawyer “…would be expensive since we already have bylaw 176 in place.” https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_qEeY_v73J1tGmDovntrv02y_BvC_12C/view

Posted in Uncategorized

Union Bay Improvement District Having Problems Abiding by Bylaw #270

http://union-bay.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Bylaw-270-Amending-Bylaw-263-Meeting-Procedures-Bylaw..pdf
.
How much is it going to cost YOU for UBID to post videos of the meetings?  This is turning into a money pit with these dolts running around trying to figure out how to prevent the public from recording the meetings and being clueless in the first place not understanding what they were dealing with.  The goal is to prevent information from reaching the landowners at any cost – and the cost of hosting their own videos is going to skyrocket.
.
If you’re wondering why you haven’t been able to watch the Union Bay Improvement District meeting video recorded Oct. 12, 2017, it’s because they don’t know what they’re doing.  They approved a bylaw which states only UBID will record the meetings and post them on the UBID website.  That’s where they ran into trouble.  They had planned on posting the videos on Youtube which is a file sharing site where you must agree to allow Youtube and its users to use your videos.  Easy to understand, right?
.
These guys want to claim copyright and prevent anyone from using their videos.  That means they have to host their own videos.  This is where it’s going to cost the landowners a pretty penny needlessly.
.
The two articles below explain in easy to understand terms why you should never host your own videos and what is required claiming ‘fair use’ of copyrighted material.  Note this from the ‘fair use’ article – parody, criticism…:

Your use doesn’t necessarily have to be “transformative” to qualify for fair use (although it definitely helps). Any use that furthers the public interest could potentially tip this factor in your direction. Parody, criticism, news reporting, scholarship, and commentary are all areas where courts have traditionally recognized fair use.

https://www.wp101.com/10-reasons-why-you-should-never-host-your-own-videos/

With that as background, here are ten reasons you should never upload video files to your own web server — particularly if your site is hosted on a shared server.


1.Server Bandwidth

Video files can be quite large in size. Unlike images—which are typically measured in kilobytes—an HD video file can easily weigh in at more than 100 MB. Now, imagine what will happen to your shared hosting server when dozens of folks attempt to watch the same video at the same time.

Your web hosting provider allocates a certain amount of bandwidth and other resources for each server on their network, based on average traffic rates that do not include serving large media files to hundreds of individuals (or more) at the same time. Too many requests for a single large file will quickly exceed the limits of the web server on which your site is hosted, and bring your site—and any other sites that also “live” on the same server—to its knees.

But you may never even get that far, because of…

2.File Size Limits and Storage Space

Most web hosting providers limit the maximum size of uploaded files to 50 MB or less, prohibiting you from uploading video files that are longer than a few minutes or so in duration. Additionally, large media files may violate the terms of the Acceptable Use Policy with your hosting provider and result in your hosting account being shut down.

If you’re able to upload large video files to your server on a frequent basis, you could eventually exceed the amount of storage space provided by your hosting account, especially if you regularly back up your site. In addition to the amount of disk space your video files will occupy, backups will begin to take significantly longer to execute. More data requires more disk space, and takes more time to backup.

3.Slow-Loading or Freezing Video

If your video file resides on a single server with a limited amount of bandwidth, folks who attempt to watch your video may experience unexpected pauses during playback while their computer waits for the file to download or stream to their computer. This problem is compounded by a slow Internet connection. Even when I hosted my videos on Amazon’s S3 content distribution network (CDN), many people still complained about slow-loading videos.

4.No Single File Format Standard for Web Video

The current HTML5 draft specification does not specify which video formats browsers should support. As a result, the major web browsers have diverged, each one supporting a different format. Internet Explorer and Safari will play H.264 (MP4) videos, but not WebM or Ogg. Firefox will play Ogg or WebM videos, but not H.264. Thankfully, Chrome will play all the major video formats, but if you want to ensure your video will play back on all the major web browsers, you’ll have to convert your video into multiple formats: .mp4, .ogv, and .webm

Now you’ve got three different video files to upload, each one potentially hundreds of megabytes in size.

(By the way, just how much bandwidth does your Internet provider allow you to use before imposing bandwidth caps? You may soon find out after you’ve uploaded several gigabytes of video files.)

5.Hope you like converting videos. A lot.

Most of your audience will likely watch your videos from their desktop or laptop with the benefit of a high-speed Internet connection. For those folks, you’ll want to deliver a large, HD-quality file so they can watch it full-screen if they so choose. Generally, this means a 1080p or 720p file at a high streaming bitrate (5000 – 8000 kbps).

But you’ll also want to encode a smaller, lower-resolution version for delivery to mobile devices like phones and tablets, as well as delivery to viewers with slower Internet connections.

Now you’ve got half a dozen or more individual video files for playback on all the major web browsers and devices. But how does your site know which of those files to serve to each person?

6.Video Players

A video player is a small piece of web software you install on your site that will automatically detect which device is requesting your video, along with its connection speed, and then deliver the appropriate version to that person.

There are dozens of excellent video players that will handle this task (like Video.js), but WordPress also includes a built-in video player that will eliminate the need for a third-party video plugin. That’s great news! But it gets a bit tricky…

7.Cumbersome Code [or Shortcodes]

Whether you use a third-party plugin or WordPress’ built-in video capabilities, you’ll need to create a bit of code to tell the video player which formats you’ve created, as well as their location on the server. It looks something like this…

<video poster="movie.jpg" controls>
<source src="movie.webm" type='video/webm; codecs="vp8.0, vorbis"'/>
<source src="movie.ogg" type='video/ogg; codecs="theora, vorbis"'/>
<source src="movie.mp4" type='video/mp4; codecs="avc1.4D401E, mp4a.40.2"'/>
<p>This is fallback content</p>
</video>

Even with the built-in support for video in WordPress, you’ll still need to construct a shortcode like this…

So now you’ve correctly assembled your shortcode, uploaded all the video files to your server, and you’ve installed a video player to handle all the “behind the scenes” detection and such. So after all this, why does your video look so much better in some browsers/devices than others?

8.Varying Quality Across Browsers

Remember earlier, when I said you’ll need to convert your videos into nearly half a dozen different formats and sizes? You’ll need a software app to handle this file conversion for you. There are hundreds of video conversion applications out there, and you may find that you need more than one to handle conversion into all the various format.

Unfortunately, every app handles the conversion process in a slightly different way, resulting in varying quality in your video files. Your video may look great as an MP4, but when you view the OGG file in Firefox, your video looks grainy or bitmapped.

Further complicating this issue, each web browser also handles playback differently, which means the exact same video file will look great in one browser, but horrible in another. I spent countless hours experimenting with the settings in my conversion software, but I never got this dialed in 100%.

9.Loss of Visibility and Traffic

YouTube is the most popular video hosting platform in the world. More importantly, they’re also one of the first places many folks turn when they’re searching for a topic. When you host your video on a third-party site like YouTube or Vimeo, you also benefit from their popularity, and folks could find your video—and subsequently, your own site—who otherwise wouldn’t have known your site existed.

Plus, the social sharing features on those services encourage other folks to share your video with their friends and family, increasing your reach.

10.Piracy

If you’re running a membership site with protected video content (like this site), you’ll want to ensure your video files can’t be downloaded by some nefarious individual and then redistributed illegally on file sharing sites.

I discovered this vulnerability the hard way, and spent the better part of a year sending DMCA takedown notices to file sharing sites, over and over again.

Because the video paths are easily exposed in the source code, anyone can simply copy the URLs, then download the videos to their own computer and redistribute at will. I found a script that obfuscated the video paths, but it wasn’t updated often, and eventually stopped working with my video player.

(BTW, one of the many reasons I use and recommend Vimeo PRO is that you can hide your videos from their public directory, and also specify a particular domain on which the video may be embedded. This ensures your videos can only be embedded on your own site.)

So what’s the best solution for adding video to your site?

Simply upload your video to a video hosting service, then embed your video into your WordPress post or page.

AND THIS:

https://help.vimeo.com/hc/en-us/articles/224976228-What-do-the-four-fair-use-factors-mean-

What do the four fair use factors mean?

Posted in Imitation board, UBID

The letter Trustee Bitten wants a legal opinion on before it is read out to the public.

I sent the following email to Chair Healey Aug. 16, 2019. Trustee Bitten didn’t want it read out tonight and wants a legal opinion. Funny, he didn’t want a legal opinion on the EXPIRED 2011 Water Infrastructure Agreement, ‘suspending’ a fellow Trustee or locking out the electorate, etc. I had to look it up because emails seem to go into email limbo and Chair Healey couldn’t provide a date.

Hello Chair Healey,
Please note:  I am addressing the violations of the bylaw – not Kaljur’s suspension – regarding the decision to ‘approve’ or ‘receive’ Jan. 17, 2019 minutes based on proper procedures.  


I would like to provide information as to the lack of procedures for Union Bay Improvement District meetings to follow up on Trustee Kaljur’s concerns regarding the violations of the Meeting Procedures Bylaw #263/270 specifically the Jan. 10 COW meeting and Jan. 17 UBID board meeting.  There were no agendas published for either meeting and the only notice referencing the Jan. 17, 2019 meeting was referenced in the Jan. Landowners Update https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wiHJtmNHFFTcDbk1ftcSgrhBJZjq7eKp/view which advises the meeting is not open to the public.  (screenshot attached).
I attempted to attend the UBID meeting at the Community Hall Jan. 17, 2019 along with reporter James Wood from the Goat Radio station.  James was advised by Jody (hall person) the meeting had been moved.  The next day the following article was published by James Wood. https://www.mycomoxvalleynow.com/48814/union-bay-chair-says-thursday-meeting-moved-without-notice-due-to-fear-of-disruption/
The emails below my signature are the ones sent out by UBID admin from Jan. 1 through Jan. 28, 2019.  Note there is no agenda notice of the Jan. 17, 2019 Board meeting and no notice of the COW meeting Jan. 10 which is referenced in counsel Jason Gratl’s letter to the board (attached). The name of the recipient has been removed by request.

I understand you are new to the position.  The problem lies with not having a qualified admin and you are never going to be effective with someone who spends their time trying to cover up the fact they don’t know the job.  You can have five great trustees but if you don’t have a qualified admin – you are spinning your wheels. The admin is supposed to be the one ‘constant’ that keeps the district running and is not political.  A professional qualified admin would never exclude a trustee from receiving all correspondence sent to other trustees – their loyalty is to the improvement district – not to certain trustees.  This admin as made a habit of excluding trustees.


I know you did not approve of my question regarding how you can trust this admin to provide you with all information regarding the governance study.  It is a valid concern since there is a history of this admin withholding correspondence from trustees he doesn’t seem to like.  Another example to add to the January meeting problems is the FACT the admin withheld a letter from UBID’s counsel regarding bylaw 264 which was received in July 2018 and yet Kaljur and Elliott didn’t receive it until the day it was voted on at the Oct. 2018 board meeting.


This board is unable to function if you do not have reference material when voting on motions.  Last night was a perfect example.  Trustee Vandenberg wasn’t comfortable voting on the motion for a temporary FOI person.  The material was not provided by the admin.  This has been the pattern leading to poor decisions or simply being forgotten.


What safeguards are in place to ensure the entire board is aware of all correspondence regarding the governance study?  It has proven to be easy for the admin to simply distribute info as he sees fit.  I have every reason to believe this admin will sabotage any attempt to become a service area just as he has since the motion was passed in Nov. 2017.  The admin and Bitten obviously conspired to prevent the study and introduced municipality status at the Jan. 2018 meeting when it had never been discussed by the board.  It is no secret KIP, Bitten and Haraldson have all pushed municipality status and their relationship with KIP is far too cosy imo.


Why isn’t this admin attending meetings?  How can questions be answered when the admin is never there?  The deputy CAO was supposedly hired to fill in for the admin – where was she?  Why do we have staff that are dictating what functions they will perform? Weren’t they hired knowing what was expected of them?
Thanks,

Posted in UBID

UBID Board Meeting Aug. 15, 2019 – audio only

EDIT: Aug. 16, 2017 @ 1:03 pm. You will notice there is a lot of back and forth when it came to approving those Jan. 17, 2019 unlawful meeting minutes. I sent the following to Chair Healey today:

Hello Chair Healey,
Please note:  I am addressing the violations of the bylaw – not Kaljur’s suspension – regarding the decision to ‘approve’ or ‘receive’ Jan. 17, 2019 minutes based on proper procedures.

 I would like to provide information as to the lack of procedures for Union Bay Improvement District meetings to follow up on Trustee Kaljur’s concerns regarding the violations of the Meeting Procedures Bylaw #263/270 specifically the Jan. 10 COW meeting and Jan. 17 UBID board meeting.  There were no agendas published for either meeting and the only notice referencing the Jan. 17, 2019 meeting was referenced in the Jan. Landowners Update https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wiHJtmNHFFTcDbk1ftcSgrhBJZjq7eKp/view which advises the meeting is not open to the public.  (screenshot attached).

I attempted to attend the UBID meeting at the Community Hall Jan. 17, 2019 along with reporter James Wood from the Goat Radio station.  James was advised by Jody (hall person) the meeting had been moved.  The next day the following article was published by James Wood. https://www.mycomoxvalleynow.com/48814/union-bay-chair-says-thursday-meeting-moved-without-notice-due-to-fear-of-disruption/
The emails below my signature are the ones sent out by UBID admin from Jan. 1 through Jan. 28, 2019.  Note there is no agenda notice of the Jan. 17, 2019 Board meeting and no notice of the COW meeting Jan. 10 which is referenced in counsel Jason Gratl’s letter to the board (attached). The name of the recipient has been removed by request.

I understand you are new to the position.  The problem lies with not having a qualified admin and you are never going to be effective with someone who spends their time trying to cover up the fact they don’t know the job.  You can have five great trustees but if you don’t have a qualified admin – you are spinning your wheels. The admin is supposed to be the one ‘constant’ that keeps the district running and is not political.  A professional qualified admin would never exclude a trustee from receiving all correspondence sent to other trustees – their loyalty is to the improvement district – not to certain trustees.  This admin as made a habit of excluding trustees.

I know you did not approve of my question regarding how you can trust this admin to provide you with all information regarding the governance study.  It is a valid concern since there is a history of this admin withholding correspondence from trustees he doesn’t seem to like.  Another example to add to the January meeting problems is the FACT the admin withheld a letter from UBID’s counsel regarding bylaw 264 which was received in July 2018 and yet Kaljur and Elliott didn’t receive it until the day it was voted on at the Oct. 2018 board meeting.

This board is unable to function if you do not have reference material when voting on motions.  Last night was a perfect example.  Trustee Vandenberg wasn’t comfortable voting on the motion for a temporary FOI person.  The material was not provided by the admin.  This has been the pattern leading to poor decisions or simply being forgotten.

What safeguards are in place to ensure the entire board is aware of all correspondence regarding the governance study?  It has proven to be easy for the admin to simply distribute info as he sees fit.  I have every reason to believe this admin will sabotage any attempt to become a service area just as he has since the motion was passed in Nov. 2017.  The admin and Bitten obviously conspired to prevent the study and introduced municipality status at the Jan. 2018 meeting when it had never been discussed by the board.  It is no secret KIP, Bitten and Haraldson have all pushed municipality status and their relationship with KIP is far too cosy imo.

Why isn’t this admin attending meetings?  How can questions be answered when the admin is never there?  The deputy CAO was supposedly hired to fill in for the admin – where was she?  Why do we have staff that are dictating what functions they will perform? Weren’t they hired knowing what was expected of them?

Thanks, Mary Reynolds, Union Bay


From: “UBID Administrator” <admin@union-bay.ca>
To: @shaw.ca
Sent: Wednesday, January 9, 2019 11:00:07 AM
Subject: New post published 2018/19 UBID Regular Board of Trustees Meeting Schedule

Hello ,

We have published a new blog in our website.

2018/19 UBID Regular Board of Trustees Meeting Schedule

You may view the latest post at https://union-bay.ca/2018-19-ubid-regular-board-of-trustees-meeting-schedule/
You received this e-mail because you asked to be notified when new updates are posted.

Thanks & Regards
Admin
No longer interested in emails from Union Bay Improvement District?. Please click here to unsubscribe

From: “UBID Administrator” <admin@union-bay.ca>
To: @shaw.ca
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2019 2:27:02 PM
Subject: New post published Landowners Update January – 2019 – rev (2)

Hello ,

We have published a new blog in our website.

Landowners Update January – 2019 – rev (2)

You may view the latest post at https://union-bay.ca/landowners-update-january-2019-rev-2/
You received this e-mail because you asked to be notified when new updates are posted.

Thanks & Regards
Admin
No longer interested in emails from Union Bay Improvement District?. Please click here to unsubscribe

From: “UBID Administrator” <admin@union-bay.ca>
To: @shaw.ca
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2019 4:29:22 PM
Subject: New post published Website Updates

Hello ,

We have published a new blog in our website.

Website Updates

You may view the latest post at https://union-bay.ca/website-updates/
You received this e-mail because you asked to be notified when new updates are posted.

Thanks & Regards
Admin
No longer interested in emails from Union Bay Improvement District?. Please click here to unsubscribe

From: “UBID Administrator” <admin@union-bay.ca>
To:@shaw.ca
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 2:19:32 PM
Subject: New post published Boil Water Notice Update for Jan 23/19

Hello ,

We have published a new blog in our website.

Boil Water Notice Update for Jan 23/19

You may view the latest post at https://union-bay.ca/boil-water-notice-update-for-jan-23-19/
You received this e-mail because you asked to be notified when new updates are posted.

Thanks & Regards
Admin
No longer interested in emails from Union Bay Improvement District?. Please click here to unsubscribe

From: “UBID Administrator” <admin@union-bay.ca>
To: @shaw.ca
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2019 7:54:52 PM
Subject: New post published UBID Regular Board Meeting Jan 17 2019 Video available on website

Hello ,

We have published a new blog in our website.

UBID Regular Board Meeting Jan 17 2019 Video available on website

You may view the latest post at https://union-bay.ca/ubid-regular-board-meeting-jan-17-2019-video-available-on-website/
You received this e-mail because you asked to be notified when new updates are posted.

Thanks & Regards
Admin
No longer interested in emails from Union Bay Improvement District?. Please click here to unsubscribe

%d bloggers like this: