More Rooming House Information

Below is the text from a document that was created as a fix/solution to the Regina Housing Crisis and Rooming Housing Debate. I like what is included in it, and hopefully the City of Regina is paying close attention to it. Enough of patting each other on the backs (read: City scratching developers backs and vice versa), it's time to get on with truly addressing this situation!

Rooming Houses in Regina

The rooming house issue in Regina is part of a much larger global phenomenon, to properly

understand its origins we need to first understand the larger context.

Regina in Context

In June 2013 Regina had the lowest unemployment rate in the country, 3.5%.¹ For the past few

years Regina has consistently had one of the ten lowest unemployment rates in the western

world.² In 2012 Regina had the second fastest economic growth in the country at 4.5%, just

behind Edmonton. We have the 4th highest per capita income $44,662 behind Calgary,

Edmonton and Ottawa.³ These realities are drawing thousands of people from all over the world

to our city.

Population Growth and Housing

Officially the population of Regina grew by 3.2%⁴ in 2012, three times the national average and

second only to Saskatoon. Unofficially, as people in the statistical field can tell you, the population

has been growing faster than official metrics.

Between 2005 and 2012 the vacancy rate dropped from about 4% to about 1%. In that same

time the average price of an existing house went from $122,184 to $301,145 an increase of

almost 250% in just 7 years.⁵

Rapid population growth driven by rising levels of prosperity has created a housing shortage.

This housing shortage will only be eliminated by either quashing prosperity or by increasing the

supply of housing. Quashing prosperity is not a politically popular option, which leaves the only

remaining option; increasing the supply of housing.

The supply of housing can be increased two ways:

1) Increase the number of dwellings. This is already being done, housing starts in the city are up

350% from 2005-2012⁶.

It will, in the short term, be difficult to further accelerate the pace of housing construction in light of the labour shortage.

2) Increase the number of people per dwelling. There is significant surplus space within Regina’s existing housing stock. The following graph shows that the number of people per dwelling has fallen by about 50% since the 1930’s; this has happened despite newer houses being significantly larger than older houses. Neighborhoods such as Hillsdale and Whitmore Park, which were constructed in the 1950’s and 60’s, were built during a time in which it was normal to have a third more people living in a house than there are today.

1 Saskatchewan Labour Force Statistics, May 2013

2 US Bureau of Labour Statistics, Local Area Unemployment Statistics.

3 Conference Board of Canada, Metropolitan Outlook Spring 2013

4 CANSIM 0510046

5 CMHC

6 Saskatchewan Economic Review 2012

The Solution to Regina’s Housing Crisis

In the long term, the housing crisis will be solved by increasing the number of dwellings, however, in the short term, the number of people per dwelling must go up to satisfy the housing needs of the population. Failure to increase the population density will result in slower economic growth, homelessness and their associated social ills.

Increasing the number of people per household will provide many benefits, most of which are covered in the document “Transforming Regina, Planning for 2040 and Beyond”. Rooming houses are the solution to Regina’s housing shortage!

The Whitmore Park and Hillsdale Community Associations

The Whitmore Park and Hillsdale community associations have recently written a letter to the City of Regina’s administration outlining their concerns regarding manifestations of the housing shortage in their neighbourhoods.

These neighbourhoods feel the effects of the housing shortage more acutely than other neighborhoods due to their proximity to the university and its 13,113 students. ⁷ The University does not have sufficient on-campus housing to accommodate the student body. The city’s transit system is anemic due to 60 years of automobilecentric development and there are insufficient parking spots to support a large commuting population. These factors force many students to live in nearby neighbourhoods so that they can easily access the campus via active transport methods.

To combat what the community associations perceive to be the problem of “rooming houses” they have proposed a new tax be levied on all properties which provide housing for nonfamily members. The revenue this regressive tax generates is to be used to enforce new regulations and subject homeowners to invasive searches of their private homes.

The community associations propose to put an arbitrary cap of 2 “rooming units” in a dwelling. This limit would restrict the supply of rental units without regard to the actual size and capacity of the dwelling, and would render homeless anybody currently living with more than two people.

We feel this will be a disaster. The effect of new taxes and regulations on rental spaces will be to reduce the supply of rental spaces at exactly the time they are most needed.

A better solution is to encourage a larger number of people to rent out rooms in their homes, thus providing renters with a greater diversity of housing options and preventing the massive overcrowding that has appeared in a few isolated instances. By diffusing people across a larger area the concerns of the community associations will be ameliorated.

Nobody wants to live in a cramped overcrowded environment, but people are doing so because there are few alternatives available to them. Forcing people out into the street is not the solution.

7 University of Regina Fact sheet

Regina Rooming House Debate

Good morning Regina!

There are so many things that the City of Regina is battling against their own taxpayers for right now, it's hard to keep track of it all! Thankfully there are some amazing local citizens who are keeping the good fight going, and working to ensure that the appropriate actions are being taken for certain issues. This one is in regards to the ongoing Rooming House debacle.

I have copied and pasted the below from Mr. Benjamin Harack, MSc BSc BA, because it summarizes, quite well, the viewpoint of many taxpayers in Regina who are of the mindset that "Rooming Houses" should most certainly not be regulated. We have enough Bylaws in place that can easily be enforced for any of the concerns that the Community Association members are bringing up. There is absolutely no need to continue with this ridiculous bylaw that punishes those in our great community who are legitimately trying to help alleviate some of the pressure in our housing crunch. 

Here you go, and by the way, they were part of the Morph My City challenge, and have an excellent document to read up on (http://www.visionofearth.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Morph-My-City-Vision-of-Earth.pdf), if you have the time. I feel strongly that this should be something that the City of Regina should, at minimum, review with these fine folks to incorporate some of their thoughts into the Design Regina OCP. Here's hoping the City is listening!

Regina’s Rooming Houses debate

By Ben Harack – July 11, 2013 

Posted in: Ben Harack's Blog, Economics, Saskatchewan, Urban Planning

• 
  
• 
  
• Email

The City of Regina has recently begun consulting residents about the subject of “Rooming Houses,” which are homes in residential areas in which both the owner and renters are residing. If all renters in a home are relatives, then it is not a Rooming House.¹ The City has asked that comments on the subject be sent to urbanplanning@regina.ca by the 19th of July, 2013.

Certain community associations and residents within the city have asked that the city heavily regulate rooming houses – effectively requiring them to be businesses in order to operate. On the other side, some residents are asking for the exact opposite: the removal of the rooming houses clause from the Zoning Bylaw which is currently thwarting many people’s attempts to legally provide rooms for rent in the city.

I decided to contribute to the discussion by writing to the City. Here is what I said:

To Whom it may concern,

I would like to encourage the City to adopt “Option 1 – Eliminate the Rooming House Definition” as its response to the current discussion on Rooming Houses. I will try to briefly lay out my reasons here.

First, the complaints that are being made by community associations and some residents are, to my knowledge, entirely covered under bylaws other than the Rooming Houses clause. Noise is covered in the zoning bylaw, and disorderly conduct by neighbours is covered in the criminal code. Overuse of parking or high traffic volumes are existing problems, but they are very distinct from the legality of rooming houses. Currently, the same amount of traffic and parking can happen legally with a large family living in a home, so the opposition to rooming houses alone is really just a form of discrimination intended to exclude people who do not (or cannot) live with their direct relatives.
Second, direct regulation of rooming houses would be an incredibly bad economic move. Regina is experiencing its fastest population growth in the last thirty years, and houses are essentially being built as fast as they possibly can be. Constraining the supply of current and future rentals in the city is undesirable because it would render effectively homeless the large number of people who currently live in such arrangements and those who would have taken advantage of such arrangements in the near future. We already have a labour shortage because of the boom. A move like this would have many effects, but it would certainly drive people away from the city because the vacancy rate would drop even lower (in fact, it would be definitively negative if current rooming houses were shut down). There is a simple causal path from rooming house regulation to economic slowdowns in Regina.

Not only should we not be regulating rooming houses further, they should be explicitly legalized so that more Regina residents feel that they have the freedom to rent out parts of their own property and thus contribute to the ongoing influx of human and financial capital that is taking place during this boom. Raising the vacancy rate and spreading population densification around the city is desirable because it will take some of the pressure off of the areas that are currently seeing dramatic increases in density (including via rooming houses). In one stroke this will reduce the intensity of the problems regarding traffic, parking, noise, and overcrowding in some areas while also improving the vibrancy and economic solvency of other areas of the city which up until now have not seen significant densification. Diversified and decentralized growth of Regina’s working population in this manner could help undo some of the ‘hollowing out’ that has taken place during the last several decades, during which Regina has seen the number of residents per dwelling unit drop from about 4.5 to 2.3.

It is my recommendation that the city explicitly legalize rooming houses and at the same time embark on a determined effort to protect those aspects of the commons that Reginians clearly care about, such as traffic reduction, safety, noise, and the on-street parking near their homes. In this way, the City can strike a balance between the freedom of house owners to do what they want with their property and the desires of neighbourhoods to defend those things they cherish in their locales. Paradoxically, allowing densification throughout the city will alleviate, rather than exacerbate, the problems of intensive densification that are being voiced by some residents and community associations. Their interests are best served by the City ensuring that all of Regina remains a vibrant, civilized, and welcoming city to live in. Free-form densification, within reason, of residential Regina is a fundamental key to its long-term prosperity.

For more information on these points, and the statistics underlying them, please see the document Transforming Regina – Planning for 2040 and beyond.

Thank you for your time,
Benjamin Harack MSc BSc BA

City Clerk's Office Violating Cities Act?

Good morning Regina!!

If you haven't been following the ordeal that is happening at the City of Regina's City Clerk's Office, regarding verifying the signatures on the Wastewater Treatment Facility Petition, you've been missing out on some really interesting stuff! Stuff that, in my opinion, is clearly violating the Cities Act, and thus, certainly opens the City of Regina to even more legal action.

It came to the attention of many this week that the City of Regina City Clerk's Office (who is supposed to remain "independent") has been calling people to verify the exact information that is contained on the petition. There is so much wrong with this, I don't know where to start, but I will try.

First off, as a quick backgrounder on this situation, the City Clerk's Office first tried to apply to the Provincial Government to make the required number of signatures even higher than the already ridiculously high number (10% of population - even more than voted for Mayor Fougere). Secondly, they went through with a fine tooth comb and picked apart the petition and struck any signatures that were "incomplete", most notably those that didn't contain a "valid date". This struck a chord with many taxpayers, in that they shook their head at how ridiculous this action was. For the City Clerk, Joni Swidnicki, with the alleged consultation of the City's astute "legal team", to go out of her way and deem that ANY signature on that petition was done in any other year than 2013, is not only ridiculous, but borders incompetence, in my opinion. The WWTP P3 deal wasn't even public knowledge until February 2013, and most certainly we haven't mastered time travel yet, so therefore ANY signature on that petition that states a month and date after the first signature, should be deemed valid. Common sense. End of argument.

THEN, this week, I hear that the City Clerk's Office, Joni and Ashley, are now calling people to confirm not only that they SIGNED the petition, but that the information contained is valid, including if they are supposedly a valid voter. For anyone that is curious, you can read SS 108(3) & SS 108(4) of the Cities Act (http://www.qp.gov.sk.ca/documents/english/Statutes/Statutes/c11-1.pdf), about what I am about to talk about. If you are one of these "lucky people" that happen to be "randomly selected", please do keep record of it, as it will be valid evidence in a Court of Law very soon.

The Cities Act very clearly states in SS 108(4):

"the Clerk may use a random statistical sampling method with a 95% confidence level to determine the sufficiency of the petition INSTEAD OF VERIFYING that the requirements of SS(3) have been met with respect to each petitioner."

It is pretty obvious to me that they are using BOTH SS(3) AND SS(4) which is in clear violation of the Cities Act. Yes, it's a technicality - who knows how BIG of a technicality - but certainly one that I would expect would hold up in a court of law. If they feel that they can find a loophole to void the petition, you bet your ass I'll find a loophole to ensure the petition is VALID and their "due process" is violating the Act.

 

Section 107 is pretty clear, as well, that, by signing the petition, you are attesting that you are indeed a valid voter, and you have not signed the petition before.

I'm no lawyer, but to me, this would mean that simply the act of signing the petition should be deemed enough evidence by the Clerk's office that they meet all requirements. All they should be allowed to do - if they choose to ignore SS 108(3) - is calling to verify people actually signed the petition, or better yet, mailing them.  

ONLY IF THEY HAVE A LEGAL CONCERN should they be applying to the COURTS to challenge if a signatory is invalid. 

Also, interesting to note, I'm not sure if they've been striking signatures because an address isn't "complete" (I'm assuming they've tried this based on the other dirty tactics they've tried), but if they have, it should be noted that an address is deemed "complete" by entering the Street Address only (no City or Postal Code required that I can interpret), or alternatively a Post Office Box Address. And the corruption and unspoken scandals continue at the City of Regina City Hall.

This should be making National Headlines, but Regina's mainstream media is so good at painting a picture of "everything's fine here, move along", that it's sticking here close to home - for now.

Have a great weekend everyone!

RM Land Annexation and Conflict of Interest

Good morning Regina!!!

Well, as expected for many months (and years by many others), the evidence is now in black and white. Former Regina Mayor, Mr. Pat Fiacco, is indeed one of the interested landowners that wants to be annexed into the City. At least, that is what is 'interpreted' from the document printed in the Leader Post today, and the Sunday Post for those of us who like the environment and don't pay to hurt it by getting an oversized paper version of what we all get electronically.

Why is this important? Well, it certainly lends very well to the pending legal action against the City of Regina, and others, and will be very difficult to fight in a Court of Law. Is it just Pat Fiacco that I'm concerned with? Of course not! But, well, it certainly is the tip of the iceberg, and I really don't need to publish much more than this to shut up the detractors out there that say I'm a conspiracy theorist or whatever.

Have a great weekend everyone and make sure to hit up Wascana Park today when the sun comes out and shines down upon our great Queen City Cruise In!!

Regina Rooming Housing Debate Continues!

Good afternoon Regina!

For those that recall, back in May, there was an open house hosted by some great residents in Whitmore Park regarding the Rooming Housing fiasco. Long story short, the City of Regina tried enforcing a ridiculous and outdated bylaw that forced homeowners to either vacate their premises or evict their tenants if they were simply renting rooms to others. This caused a lot of outrage, understandably, and the need for clarification by the residents and the City of Regina. Mayor Fougere went to the media and stated that this was simply a case of "an overzealous employee" that shouldn't have sent out official letters stating the homeowners have 30 days to comply, or face up to $10,000 fine and/or time in jail. I respectfully disagree with this statement, as I find it very hard to believe that a "low level employee" would have the authority to send out such a letter without higher-up approval.

I received this email today from Adam Knutson, who asked me to publish it on my blog. As I am rarely one to say no to respectful requests, here it is, in all it's glory! For those that want to follow them on Facebook, check out this link: https://www.facebook.com/groups/293704457430491/

(I have taken the liberty to bold items that I feel are very important to note)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am writing to you about the Rooming house situation in Regina.  The next step in the battle appears to be July 10th @ 7pm at the Knox Metropolitan Church.  This town hall style meeting is being put on by the City of Regina itself this time and they are expecting more then the 250 that showed up for the May 9th meeting that the Whitmore Park Community Association put on.

I have been passed this email and attachment from a source of mine.  The attachment details what the Whitmore Park Community Association(WPCA) expect the city to do in regards to rental and rooming houses.

I personally have a few concerns about their goals.  I personally believe that the source of all the problems here is in fact high rent.  High rent is why there are more people getting crammed into houses simply because they are trying to split the cost enough ways to make housing affordable.  The solutions that are proposed in that document will do 2 things.  Cut supply and increase costs.  I think that this will make the housing situation worse in Regina if they get their way.

1.  Licensing.  This concerns me because these licenses won't be issued for free and because they will have a cost we can expect that cost to be transferred to the tenant.
2.  Sub Point c) "R1-Residential Detached zoned areas have a limit of 2 rooming units." is a horrible recommendation.  Where does this group think that the people who are currently renting in homes with more then 2 people are going to go?  This will horribly cut supply and with our understanding of economics will put severe upward pressure on rent.
3.  Permits.  Essentially between the hassle of licensing and permits I expect a reduction in the supply of rentals.  We both know what that will do to price.
4.  No daily or weekly rentals allowed.  This is contentious to me because I had some pipeliners rent from me before and they wanted weekly rentals because they might be told Friday they would be based in Regina for 3 months and on Monday get told to move to another city.  It was just the nature of their line of work.  It worked out that they did stay at my place for more then 2 months every time they were in town.
5.  The call for city staff to monitor local web-sites that list rooming units to heighten compliance with the related bylaws.  Basically calling for an expensive surveillance state.  This will cost taxpayers and ultimately the tenants paying for the licensing and enforcement a lot of money.  Rent price would be forced up.
6.  They claim "...and likely increase the number of accommodation choices for roomers."  I think I have clearly laid out how and why they are going to increase costs and cut supply with these tactics.

I hope for two things from contacting you.  First that you can provide me some feedback on my views and secondly I'd like to see a lot of people who are struggling with rent come out to the meeting and let this group know that they are wrong and that they can't take another rent hike.  I take it you have some contacts who would be interested in this information and meeting.  The meeting information is as follows:

Knox Metropolitan Church
July 10th, 2013 @ 7pm.
City of Regina Public consultation meeting.

Adam Knutson,
Embattled Rooming House Operator


-------- Original Message --------

Subject:	Community expectations - Hillsdale and Whitmore Park
Date:	Thu, 13 Jun 2013 09:43:20 -0500
From:	Brian and Kathy Black <hobbes.dog@hotmail.com>
To:	wpca.treasurer@sasktel.net <wpca.treasurer@sasktel.net>, secretary@whitmorepark.ca <secretary@whitmorepark.ca>
CC:	terry.madole@gmail.com <terry.madole@gmail.com>, Luc Lemoine <lemoine@sasktel.net>, jjking@accesscomm.ca <jjking@accesscomm.ca>, jeffrey.king@aonhewitt.com <jeffrey.king@aonhewitt.com>

I have sent you the community expectation report that was provided to the City managers at our Tuesday morning, June 11, 2013 meeting outlining what we, as representatives for our 2 communities, suggest is a plan of action that our communities expect them to propose as part of the solution for rooming house and other room rentals to our City Council.  The City Managers were very receptive to our proposals and this was also endorsed by our Councillor Barbara Young who was at the WPCA meeting last evening and had talked to them later on.

Terry Madole, Luc Lemoine and Jeffrey King from Whitmore Park have been part of this plan and it was stated at last night's WPCA meeting that this report should be included with the minutes of the meeting.

The City intends to have another community meeting so that city residents will have an opportunity to listen to their proposals that they will include in their submission to City Council on July 29, 2013 regarding the options to control rooming houses and other rental properties in Regina. The meeting will have to be arranged in a larger venue than last time to accommodate the expected larger audience than our May 9 meeting at St. Martins. I would suggest watching the City Page portion of the Leader-Post for the meeting date announcement.

Brian Black

WWTP Petition - Red Herring?

Good morning Regina!

I had a very long, interesting discussion with Rob Court yesterday, at the Design Regina information session, regarding the Wastewater Treatment Plant. At the time, I wasn't aware of exactly who he was, or what role he played, but now that I've had some time to digest what he told me in person, and reviewed online, there are some very serious issues that I have with what he has told me in person, and what is in previous media reports. Mr. Court is a Senior Engineer at the City of Regina, and has been working on the WWTP for some time now. He has been with the City of Regina for two years, and ten years with the City of Saskatoon prior to that.

This article, in particular, is where I have a major concern. While the WWTP Petitioners are focused on the P3 aspect of things, and kudos to them for doing that, the reality is that, according to my research, I still stand behind my statement that we DO NOT require a $230M+ new facility. Why am I being so bold to say that? Well, read the article, "There's Something In the Water" http://www2.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/news/story.html?id=d26d7034-e91a-45e9-9e37-f350678d42a4. In particular, according to Rob Court himself, we "meet and exceed our permit to operate". I've been saying this for over a year now. The major focus for the City of Regina, that Mr. Court suggested to me in person, is that of Nitrogen, Ammonia and Phosphate being released into Wascana Creek. The question becomes: Is a BRAND NEW FACILITY really necessary to address these relatively minor issues (when you compare it to the overall situation)? Consider that the current facility itself is anywhere between 30 and 50 years old, depending on which part you look at. Consider even further that a majority of the plant has even been upgraded over the years, and in the early 21st Century, Regina's water treatment was, in fact, considered to be one of THE BEST in Canada. Has it really deteriorated that much in 10 years? And, if so, WHY?

We've been told, over and over and over again, that we aren't meeting new Provincial and/or Federal Regulations to be implemented by 2016. HOWEVER, no one from the City is willing to publicly release the specifics on the contaminants that we currently release into Wascana Creek, nor are they willing to release the specifics on what these alleged new regulations require. The article briefly touches on World Health Organization standards, but this is far from any Provincial or Federal Regulated Guidelines. "Part one of the study found very high ammonia and phosphate concentrations, both of which exceeded guidelines." <-- What isn't clear with this statement is WHICH guidelines are they referring to? The WHO, Provincial, or Federal?

This is about as close to a public statement that we can get so far - from the article:
"The province has sort of set some mandates with respect to the City of Regina treatment facility by the end of 2016," he said. "So we're aiming to basically upgrade our treatment plant in line with those new coming provincial regulations. As a city, we are committed to ensuring that we're maintaining our regulatory compliance." <--- In this quote, it would be suggested that these new guidelines are provincial, but when pressured, the City of Regina has sent information that doesn't support this. In fact, some on Twitter have referred to the Federal Regulations, which again, we meet and exceed.

In the end, while the WWTP P3 Petition is a great thing for democracy, I feel VERY strongly that we all need to get educated on the realities of this situation. And, that is listening to what both sides are feeding you, but take what they tell you with a grain of salt. Know that both sides will feed you bullshit, and good information. The key is to sift through and figure out which is which. Most importantly, something that I stress to the Regina Media every single day - ASK THE RIGHT QUESTIONS. If something doesn't sound quite right, chances are they aren't. Keep probing until you get answers that satisfy your request. The City is unwilling to publicly share the Risk Matrix for this project, for example, saying that it would compromise Privacy concerns, which would actually demonstrate just how big of an issue, say the Ammonia is, and how big an issue, say our current plant is meeting guidelines. The question then becomes - WHY won't they release this information? I do not buy into the "privacy" argument. These are OUR tax dollars. We DEMAND to know how they are to be spent.

There are too many unanswered questions, and unfortunately, this is all too common with the City of Regina in recent years.

We NEED to demand better accountability and transparency BEFORE this gets put to a vote.

PLEASE do your part and DEMAND it from your City Council and your City Hall. 

Have a great day everyone!

"Democracy Be Damned!" [sic] - Mayor Michael Fougere

Good morning Regina!!!

What a beautiful start to the weekend. What was looking to be a rain-filled weekend, is now turning out to be sun-filled, at least for this morning so far. This is God shining down on us all, saying that he is watching over us and taking care of us, and allowing us all to get our great City back from the greedy hands of developers and construction related parties.

For those of you who haven't heard the news by now, this past week has been - eventful - to say the least. It began with news that the Water Watch group was nearing it's expected goal of just over 19,000 signatures in order to force a referendum on this very controversial project. Keep in mind, that is almost as many votes as ANY current City Councillor or even the MAYOR received in the 2012 Civic Election. Then, the City of Regina ramps up their continued propaganda campaign to try to convince the general public that the P3 project is "the way to go", no ifs ands or buts about it. What many people, thankfully, are realizing is that, no matter how good something is, there will always be risks involved. We have yet to hear any of those risks identified from the City of Regina. All they continue to do is push, push, push needless propaganda, bordering on outright lies, in order to push their agenda forward. Then, there was an announcement on Thursday that the Water Watch group is very much nearing their goal, and with over a week to go, it was pretty evident they were going to meet and exceed that requirement.

Then...Friday. Friday. What can I say about Friday. Anyone that is familiar with politics, you will know that when you want your news to be pretty much ignored and more of "filler", you publish your story on Friday. Well, I think City Hall needs a refresher on this, because they went to the extent of making a "major" announcement about the Federal Government pitching in "up to" $58.5 Million for the WWTP upgrade project, as long as it's a P3 project. (http://cjme.com/story/update-regina-city-hall-seeks-raise-petition-requirement-water-facility-issue/115003) <----BTW, I LOVE how the headline is certainly NOT the one that the City of Regina was hoping for. MANY KUDOS to Rawlco for doing this. 

One would wonder, why would you do such a "major" announcement on a Friday, given the known risks involved with making ANY announcements on Friday, when it's typically going to be ignored by the majority of the intended audience. Well, this is where things get even more suspect, and certainly add more fuel to the fire that is the pending Legal Action against the City of Regina, and many, many other related parties for the Criminal Code violation of Municipal Corruption. Apparently, on Thursday, City Clerk Joni Swidnicki, whom I had the utmost of respect for - emphasize "had" - sent an email to the Water Watch group telling them that she had submitted a letter to the Provincial Government requesting them to change the number of required signatures for a Petition to be based on the population according to the Health records, and not the Census data, as is already clearly written in the Cities Act.

While this, apparently, is an allowable request, it is pure filth, and filled with nothing but the worst of intentions, in my opinion. Not only do the Health records indicate those within the "Regina Qu'appelle Health REGION", but it also unfairly adds another 1,400 required signatures to the petition requirement, which is less than a week from it's deadline. This, to me, is nothing more but a giant slap in the face of Democracy. And, what's worse? Mayor Fougere is playing ignorant on this subject, claiming that he "wasn't aware" of that letter, but if it were indeed sent, then "it's just for clarification as to the actual number required". To this I have to quote Seth and Amy from Saturday Night Live and say - REALLY?!?!? For a "seasoned" politician, Mayor Michael Fougere is probably one of the worst under pressure that I have ever been witness to. At least the former Mayor would (allegedly) tell them where to go and threaten them with their jobs if they dare call him out.

So, in the end, this week has been quite the eventful week. Thankfully adding even more to the pending Legal Action, and the impending need to call for the resignation of quite a number of senior officials at the City of Regina. They have had plenty of opportunity to come clean, and avoid legal action for months, if not years now, and they continue to deflect, thinking that they are untouchable, and no one is going to bother to attempt to bring them and their castle down. Thankfully, that is soon to happen, either forcibly through the Criminal Code enforcement, or voluntarily, through their tendered resignations.

Have a great weekend everyone!!

Why Don't I Accuse the RM of Sherwood of Conflict of Interest?

Good morning Regina!!

I've been asked this a few times already, by parties that have a genuine concern for why I am going after the City of Regina and related parties for Conflict of Interest, and not the RM of Sherwood, specifically the RM's Reeve, Kevin Eberle. Well, CJME printed an article this morning that pretty well sums up why I don't feel there has been any malintent by the RM or the Reeve. Yes, he has lands, it's pretty out in the open there. Yes, he stands to make some money from this development. But, as outlined in the article itself, he actually has a home on these lands, his family homestead, and they continue to farm it to this day. If that doesn't tell you that he didn't just buy this land to make money one day, I don't know what else will. This is in direct contrast to certain parties that stand to eventually profit (substantially) from the annexation of their lands from the RM to the City of Regina, who have never held the lands for any true personal reason, other than that of land speculation. There is nothing wrong with land speculation in a regular circumstance, but as will be outlined in the Court Documents, it's the intent that is key in the City of Regina and related parties' situation.

Quotes to note from the Article:
"I'm not interested in having a process that a lot of people have spent a lot of time trying to work forward to have this all derailed just because an unsolicited offer came to us," he stressed.

Eberle explains that 469 acres of the 736 acre space laid out to house the development currently belong to him and his wife. Initially they rejected the idea of selling their land, he claims, uncomfortable with the idea of selling off the only home his children have ever known.

"It's where I live. We're quite comfortable where we are," he said.

Since the original pitch was made, however, the company adjusted it's footprint to exclude the Eberle's home quarter. Since the family still has land to farm north of Regina they decided to agree to contract out the land. Eberle says the project is just too important to the area, partially because developer Great Prairie is including a fully self-sustaining sewage treatment plant and water system in the plans. He feels the ability it will give the RM to service other developments in the region will help advance the council's desires to open up to development.

"We've been struggling to try and bring land use change into the RM for a very long time. This dates back to 2000, 2001."

Eberle is referring to the history of discussions around putting an Official Community Plan in place and the years of disagreements the RM and the City of Regina have had over regional development planning. He says he takes the possible perceptions of impropriety so seriously he's actually recused himself from any discussions having to do with the OCP as well. The document, which lays out the council's vision of long-term future growth, has gotten a lot of attention the last two weeks because it conflicts with the recently-revealed plans of Regina's council to annex large tracts of lands the mayor insists will be needed to grow the city in the future.

"I don't want this to harm the reputation of the RM or the council in any way, shape, or form so I've completely recused myself."

http://www.cjme.com/story/sherwood-reeve-denies-conflict-interest-plans/112945?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

The Regina Housing Crisis - All Talk VS All Action - You Decide

Good morning Regina!!!

Another glorious weekend ahead of us here, with the perfect temperatures of a balmy 70F, which in my eyes, is better than any of the 90s (sounds better when you use the Imperical system), because you don't have to worry about wasting energy of A/C and/or fans, and can truly enjoy all that Mother Nature has to offer.

Something that has been an issue for me for some time now, basically since I opened my eyes and started listening to those actually affected by the housing crisis in the most visible ways, has been that of homelessness. Whether we choose to believe it or not, it is a serious issue in Regina, and we need to do something NOW to address this known problem, before it gets even worse. Step 1 is to open our eyes, and the City of Regina seems to want to do everything in their power to downplay the seriousness of this situation, in an apparent attempt to make the problem even worse, which in the end, helps their developer friends literally profit off of others' pains. I met one tremendous Social Activist over the last year and a half, that being Stella Rogers. Anyone that knew her, knew that she always, always had her heart in the right place. She had faced the severity of homelessness in a number of ways, and had experienced it in several cities. She had lived in Regina for some time, and I actually had the pleasure of meeting this fine lady during the Occupy Regina movement. Sadly, she had since relocated back to Vancouver, and recently passed on to the Heavenly Father.

For anyone that had been following that movement, you would be aware that I did not like the idea of what Occupy Regina was doing, that being what I saw only as what the media portrayed, and that being deliberately breaking bylaws to prove some apparent point. My eyes were closed to the realities of the situation here in Regina, and as such, I actually sided with the City of Regina saying that these people should be obeying by bylaws to demonstrate whatever message they wanted to get across. After having the courage to attend ONE of their meetings, after several invitiations to do just that, I must say I was blown away. These people were not the bums that the media made them look to be, they weren't the "get a job" crowd that some in our community only saw them as. They were real, living, breathing human beings, who had the courage to bring about an awareness campaign, and in that regard, the point of breaking the bylaws was that of civil disobedience. Since that day, I have never been the same. That was the inspiration for my Mayoral Campaign, and also for my steadfast approach at standing up against the ridiculous rule of our current City Council and their alleged decorum, which is unique to Regina in all of Canada.

Fast forward to the Mayor's "Housing Summit" and the RM's recent announcement for (in my opinion) a TRUE attempt at working towards a solution of this ever growing problem in our community. The Prairie Dog wrote up a very well written article, http://www.prairiedogmag.com/2013-05-30/lets-not-think-big/#comment-106493, and it addresses the issue directly. Without some great community activists like Stella Rogers, Patrick Smythe, or Dr. Marc Spooner, to name but a few, this issue would continue to be on the back burner, and Mayor Fougere would continue to pretend it's not a real issue, and continue to say it's not his problem. (Oh wait, I guess that last point is still true - he still uses that as a fall back excuse)

This article brings the crux of the problem right into the forefront. We need to change out approach and our attitude in this City and Province in order to truly affect change. We need to first recognize that we have a housing crisis, a serious one at that, AND we have a homelessness crisis, a VERY serious one at that. What's the way to bring this to the forefront? Tent cities? (Like Occupy Regina attempted to do?) Unfortunately, I think that seems to be the ONLY THING that the City of Regina will listen to, which applies severe PUBLIC PRESSURE.

It's sad that the City of Regina won't listen to the people who are actually facing the problem, and instead continue to cater to the developers who make billions off these exact problems, and actually profit by making these problems worse. Something needs to change Regina, and it's our attitudes. If the City of Regina doesn't want to recognize this is a serious problem, and the Council continues to pretend that they are actually DOING something to fix it, we the citizens are forced to take drastic actions, like the one I am doing, that being taking legal action against the City and other related parties.

Did I WANT to have it come to this point? Of course not! Did I do everything I've done over the past year and a half, specifically with the intent to sue the City? Of course not. BUT, after banging your head against the wall over and over again, there comes a time that you begin to realize that the only way to get through that brick wall is with a (metaphorical) sledgehammer. The lawsuit IS that (metaphorical) sledgehammer.

Stay tuned Regina - the City has until Saturday, June 8, 2013 to respond to my Notice of Civil Action.  

Will they implement the actions I demand of them? 

Time will only tell.

Notable Quote from the above article:
"You have an opportunity here in Regina and in Saskatchewan to get at this and fix it while it’s a million dollar problem before it’s a billion dollar problem”

My Two Cents:
I think there’s only one statement that needs to be made here. The City of Regina is all talk. This has been proven. The RM of Sherwood: Seem to want to walk the walk. As demonstrated by their MEGA PROJECT announcement this week. You can’t get a better real-world example of a situation where talk means nothing without action. I heard very little need for BS talk from the RM, and pretty much all action. I guess we will see who actually cares to address the affordable housing situation in Regina. So far, RM of Sherwood: 1 City of Regina: 0 (Hell the RM, in my opinion, deserves bonus points for not spending months upon months promising something and delivering nothing – like a certain other former mayoral candidate, now mayor)

Regina Parking Woes - Bylaws & Fair Treatment

Good morning Regina!!!

Well, the past 48 hours have been, to say the least, interesting on Twitter. If you don't have Twitter, or you don't follow me on Twitter, you really, really should get into it. At least for the lively discussions that happen on there! If you haven't been paying attention to the news or City Council over the past few days, something that has caused some eyebrows to be raised is the application for a new Night Club on Albert Street - right next door to the Regina Chamber of Commerce and a Chiropractic Clinic. Nothing says "Party Hard" like being stuck between two businesses of this nature!

So, these "lively discussions" on Twitter began on Tuesday, I believe, when the Metro printed an article that outlined some honest concerns by Mr. Adam Sperling, Owner of the Slow Pub and La Bodega. Both places that I have rarely if ever visited before, but may make it my #1 priority to frequent going forward. Why? Well, simply out of spite for these know-it-alls that seem to think the rules don't apply to them, who are opening said night club across the street. Why do I take such a hard stance on this you ask? Well, read on my friends, read on!

Speaking towards the Metro article that the owners of the proposed night club found so offensive (http://metronews.ca/news/regina/678397/improved-city-planning-needed-for-regina-business-parking-pub-owner-says/), you will find that there are specific parking bylaws that these new owners are being asked to "be relaxed" by quite a significant amount. As far as renovations go, I am not sure what the deal is there, as to how much has been done or how much hasn't, and honestly - no one's shown us the top floor yet. HOWEVER, the owners of said building are alleging that the Metro told lies in this story, which - when I read the story - seems to be completely inaccurate. If anything, it's more about the fact that these new owners are upset that the Metro dared to report a story without getting "their version" of the story first. They've even gone so far as to call the Metro out on Twitter, saying that "they didn't even try to get a hold of us" - because apparently, they are the easiest people to get in contact with. That's a direct quote from them. Apparently, if you believe you are easily approachable, and the media says they couldn't get in contact with you, then they must be lying - dammit.

So, after I asked these guys what their side of the story was, here's how I have managed to make sense of what they've responded with:

1) The new owners - Derek Wu, Colter Wood, Jim Demeray and Trevor Anderson - are upset because the Metro reported that there are four owners and not three. To me, this is silly, childish and something they shouldn't even be bitching about. I've got photo evidence that proves that there may be others involved - not that I really give a shit, nor should anyone, other than to prove these owners wrong in their accusations of being unfairly "attacked" by the Metro.
UPDATE: In follow up to my post, I've been informed that Mr. Jim Demeray is actually not an owner but the landlord. With that said, again, this is a trivial matter, and really not something anyone should bicker over or make a big deal out of. HOWEVER - I'm not sure how many typical landlords attend a "celebration party" for their tenants success of bypassing a bylaw. (I'm having issues uploading photos - but suffice it to say, Mr. Demeray was at the celebration)

2) These new owners appear to be upset that they think Mr. Sperling is more concerned about competition, than the actual issue at hand, which is parking - or lack thereof. At first, I didn't fully understand this problem, but after reading more today, it makes perfect sense.

2a) The new business requires minimum 12 parking stalls for customers. Of which they have only "three" on-site (behind the bldg - more intended for staff than customers - but whatever, semantics). They also allegedly have an "agreement" with the Chamber of Commerce (which nobody has bothered to show the public other than the verbal diarreha that comes out of Mr. Hopkins mouth - be careful believing anything you hear from that guy is all I'm saying), that the Chamber is "allowing" them allegedly "exclusive access" to their six (or three depending on news reports today) spots in the back of THEIR building. So, you either have 6 or 9 "on site" parking spots. Leaving 3 or 6 to be addressed - which is where this bylaw comes in and talks about "caveated parking", and how it has to be within a certain distance (30M).

The parking that these owners have approached Impark about is actually 75M away, more than double the allowable distance. They are asking that this bylaw be "relaxed", and say it's "standard operating procedure" and that the Slow Pub owners also had the same treatment. I haven't had a chance to talk with Mr. Sperling yet, but if this is the case, then it opens the question as to why has this bylaw not been reviewed since that time. Of note, however, is that Slow Pub also has an actual parking lot in front of it, where it is pretty obvious that it is customer parking, not employee parking, where this new night club does not.

2b) The issue I see that Mr. Sperling has, and understandably so, is that he is concerned that the patrons of this new night club will park in his lot and walk across the street. Not only taking spaces away for his actual clientelle, but potentially taking customers away from his business. Yes, that's competition, but it's about far more than that. He should not have to be forced to tow cars from the lot - and the City DOES play a role in this - by ensuring that they adhere to the bylaws that are set out for this very purpose.

3) This issue exploded on Twitter over the last 48 hours. Why? Because of the actual bylaw issues that these guys are blatantly getting at least preferred treatment? A situation where this application should NOT be approved at least until all those issues are cleared up first - none of this "Subject to" bullshit? NOPE. It's because they are pissed off. And, well, they have connections in this City. Well known connections. And, well, when you dare to challenge these people - in their "clique" - you are automatically labelled an asshole, and you are the devil. Whether it be the Metro for reporting "not all views", or Slow Pub for complaining that they are not abiding by the written Bylaws. Who is in this clique? Some pretty heavy hitters. I won't get into name-dropping in here, just suffice it to say - I'm not surprised one bit by ANY of the individuals involved in their "clique". And you thought High School was bad? Now we're playing with real money and real life issues that affect people's livelihoods. Oh - and tax dollars.

There might be those that say I am biased because of who is in their "clique" - and no I am not. I don't care who you are, or who your family are, or what connections you think you have in this City. I don't care how much weight you think you hold in this City (because of the "tax dollars you represent" - Mr. John Hopkins, CEO of Chamber direct quote), you do not get special treatment by those in this City just because you think you should. I am disgusted at these people's behaviour, and embarassed they are living in our City, let alone representing it on a National and International scale.

In the end - what lesson have I learned from daring to ask legitimate questions of these new owners? By the way, there was only one reasonable person who actually kept his cool with the many questions thrown out - Derek Wu, I must congratulate him on that. DO NOT CHALLENGE THE FOLKS IN THIS CLIQUE - if you don't want your business/media outlet to be swarmed with hate mail/negative "word of mouth" through Social Media, etc/attacks/boycotting etc. by those "powers that be" in this City. Sadly, the Prairie Dog Magazine experienced this with the last Mayor, but I think it's gotten better (??) with Mayor Fougere. Sadly, there are other media outlets in this City that appear to be more inclined to be speaking podiums for the City and these "powers that be" than anything else. I commend the Metro AND Prairie Dog for not being afraid to tell it like it is. It may not flatter everyone, but news is not meant to be flattering. It's meant to tell a story. It's meant to tell the truth. Regardless of empty threats by the City and/or their "elitist clique" that they will (OMG) pull their advertising dollars from you if you DARE print anything that offends them. Big fucking babies is what these "Powers that be" are.

The one name I will drop here is Chelsea Manz of RealRadio.ca - I won't say much on here, but just go check out her Twitter account if you get a chance (@chelsea_manz). It's truly unfortunate that this promising up and coming business venturist is making some pretty disturbing comments towards myself, and she's only hurting herself and her business more than anything by her explosive Tweets over the last 24 hours. All because she didn't like that her buddy was being challenged with actual questions. Sorry Chelsea - I call them as I see them, and if you don't like it, then have fun with your buddies when Regina finally does get cleaned up of this bullshit by your "friends" that you think you have in Regina.

Have a great Regina Day everyone!!!!

Housing & Parking - Two Major Issues: Easy to Fix?

Good morning Regina!

Well, it is looking like the City of Regina and Mayor Michael Fougere are facing some pretty intense heat from the general public, and the media, regarding housing, and now it appears that parking enforcement is also on the radar. What's nice about this? Not much. Other than the fact that these are two specific campaign platform points that I ran on, that - while not the panacea - would have provided a very reasonable and viable solution for each of these problems.

The first being the Affordable Housing and the current housing crisis that is affecting the residents of Regina. Aside from the Stadium, this was the hot button issue on the campaign trail in 2012 during the Civic Election. In fact, I would argue that it took priority over the Stadium, simply because there was nothing much anyone could do about the stadium project - City Council was bound and determined to ram the Stadium project through no matter what the election results told them. It has become quite obvious in recent weeks and days that the Mayor's Housing Summit, promised by Mayor Fougere as "Step One" in addressing these severe housing issues in our City, is doing nothing more than providing lip service to those directly impacted by the situation, and is setup to be more of a networking opportunity for those developers, construction companies, and government officials.

One solution that I had proposed, admittedly not as vocally as I should have, was to look at other cities to determine what has worked, and what hasn't worked as well, in addressing their housing situations. Regina is not alone in experiencing this problem - the root problem being uncontrolled growth - and thus, we should take the time to learn from other Cities, rather than trying to define a "Made in Regina" solution to the problem. Thankfully, it appears that this is something that Mayor Fougere is borrowing from my toolbag as part of this Housing Summit (http://www.leaderpost.com/business/Regina+looks+other+Canadian+cities+inspiration+solve+housing/8380205/story.html). But, the obvious question is - why do we need an expensive summit to learn something that a few phone calls and a few meetings could have addressed in November? You know, right after the election, proving that it was actually his number one priority, rather than the Stadium project.

I could go on for paragraphs about how to fix the Housing situation, but I will hold my comments until later to see what concrete plans actually do come out of this networking opportunity for the elite. Now onto parking (http://globalnews.ca/news/558805/regina-faces-a-parking-crunch-as-the-city-plans-to-increase-enforcement/). This one is actually a very simple fix - or at least from those I've consulted on this. The unfortunate thing is the City of Regina seems to be more focussed on enforcing their self-created parking problems, rather than proactively providing solutions to the problem of parking in the downtown core. It's obvious for anyone that works within the downtown region that parking IS a problem. There are off-street parking solutions, but very few, and what there are, there is at least a year-long waiting list. And, you can't park in a metered spot for more than two hours, so the next solution? Park in the residential areas in the vicinity of downtown! Great idea, right? Wrong. There is also a two-hour limit to parking in these areas, and the unfortunate thing is - this is only setup as an apparent tax-grab by the City, rather than providing any actual solutions. People continue to park in these areas, regardless of how many tickets they get, and this never actually addresses the problem.

What was the solution that I proposed over a year ago? Talk to the companies that are experts in parking, like ImPark. Yes, I get that not everyone likes companies specializing in parking, but the reality is - they know the market best - why not let them handle the situation? There are things the City can do to alleviate the residents concerns with private parking companies, and that is working with them, instead of against them. When I met with the Executives at ImPark last March, they loved the ideas I was proposing. When I asked why they weren't pursuing these solutions, the answer was simple. The City was unwilling to work with them. The City has a view that they want to focus on Transit, rather than the known problem of downtown parking and traffic. This is truly unfortunate, especially considering the Transit is - less than ideal - at the current moment.

So, with all that said, hopefully the City is willing to revisit this issue, and we can work towards a proactive solution to the simple fixes to downtown issues of Traffic, Congestion and Parking. Once I have a spare moment to arrange a meeting with them, I will try to do that, and maybe, just maybe, we can fix this known problem for future years!

Have a great Regina Day everyone!

Regina's Housing Crisis: Made even worse by the City of Regina

Good morning Regina!!

In what even the City of Regina admits is a ridiculous bylaw, it would appear that this week is far more about action than words. Within days of the Regina Housing Summit which is planned to occur May 13 & 14, news broke Monday with a CTV exclusive report (later reported by other local media outlets), and gaining more traction by the hour, the City of Regina is in some hot water as it tries to enforce a bylaw that, get this, prevents homeowners from renting out rooms in their house to "non-relatives" for "compensation". What's worse? This is perfectly allowable in that very same bylaw - IF THE OWNER DOESN'T LIVE THERE!!! Yes, you read that right Regina, both situations result in the same alleged inconveniences that those in "mid to upper scale neighbourhoods" complain to the City about, but yet, one is perfectly alright, while the other can land you with a $10,000 fine or up to a year in jail. Yep, that's your reward for helping with the Regina Housing Crisis, folks! FINED or IMPRISONMENT.

This is why I say, strongly, that actions speak far louder than words. No amount of "elitist" bullshit Housing Summit event, no matter how well-intended, can offset the horrible PR nightmare that is only just beginning for the City of Regina with this one ridiculous bylaw - or more to the point, the enforcement of said ridiculous bylaw. I recall at a recent housing "information" session (it was supposed to be Q&A, but a lot of people left with more Q's than A's), that the City Deputy Manager, Jason Carlston, himself, agreed this bylaw was outdated and needed to be ammended and/or reviewed. First off, I was blown away that this bylaw even existed at that time, but I thought, "thank goodness they aren't enforcing such a stupid bylaw." Then, BAM, Monday, here we go, enforcement. Keep in mind, folks, this is only the first such situation to be reported to the Media. How many others have silently allowed the City of Regina to walk all over them and evicted their tenants because they were afraid of the penalties that the City would enforce on them?

With the above in mind, and considering Regina is facing an extremely tight housing crisis (Vacancy at or below 1% for many months/years now), I STRONGLY encourage each and every one of you to do AT LEAST one of three things:

#1 - Phone your City Councillor and tell them to STOP ENFORCING THIS BYLAW until it has been reviewed and updated. Even the BYLAW ENFORCEMENT MANAGER has been quoted on TV as saying that it's a ridiculous bylaw, but "they have no choice but to enforce it". Actually, this is completely false. They do have the option to explain to the complainers about their honest concerns with this ridiculous bylaw and that they are looking into ways to address it. I believe that this would alleviate any concerns of those residents who are upset with the situations, on both sides.

#2 - Attend the Meeting at St. Martin's Parish on Thursday evening from 7-9pm, where the City has agreed to meet with residents about this utterly ridiculous situation. It is my personal hope that they will say "oops" and reverse this ludicrous decision until updates to the bylaws are made.

or

#3 - Take part in the "Enough Talk, Let's Walk" put on by Carmichael Outreach on Monday, May 13, 2013 at 12:00PM. Details below:

ATTENTION CITY OF REGINA TAXPAYERS CONCERNED ABOUT THE REGINA HOUSING CRISIS:

Do you struggle with housing or have you struggled with housing in the past? Are you currently homeless or know someone who is? Carmichael Outreach would like to invite you to join our walk in hopes to raise awareness surrounding Regina’s current housing crisis.

Date: Monday, May 13, 2013
Start Time: 12:00 pm
Walk will begin: North Central Community Association (1264 Athol St.)
Walk will end: In front of City Hall, approx 2:00 pm (2410 Victoria Avenue)

Following the walk Carmichael will hold a press conference where everyone will be invited to share their stories, ask questions regarding the city’s current housing strategy, and express any concerns. Come out and support your community and get people talking. We would like to hear your story!

If you have any questions or concerns regarding the walk please feel free to contact Laura Dieter or Alaina Harrison at carmichael.housing@accesscomm.ca . We can also be reached at Carmichael Outreach Inc. (306) 757-2235.

Community Approach to Solving Community Issues - Part One

Good afternoon Regina!

I hope everyone is out enjoying the sunshine and warmth the past couple of days, after the long winter we had! I enjoyed a lot of it outdoors, and now took a break to relax indoors. Too much sun and heat isn't necessarily the best thing either!

So, the other day, someone brought up the subject of my apparent "personal hatred" for certain individuals in this City and certain organizations. For the longest time, I simply laughed this off as something that people just brought up to find something, anything, to complain about what I do. Then, I decided, okay I'll ask the question "Is this what you honestly believe?" I was shocked, to say the least, to see the legitimate responses from some folks that I did not expect to see the response from. With that said, I guess I need to really clear the air as to why exactly it is that I have certain feelings towards certain individuals, and understand that I hold no hatred in my heart for any individual or organization, I simply want to ensure that no one ever gets a "free ride" in life, especially when it's on the taxpayer's dime. If they want to screw people over on their own dime, as much as I can't stand it, so be it. Go for it. Just don't ever expect me to ever support you or your efforts until you realize what wrongs you are doing in life, and you have made amends for those wrongs.

First off, regarding the Fiacco family, probably one of the most misunderstood issues, perpetuated by them and their (extended) family, and continual harassment from those that choose to associate themselves with this family, for whatever reason, personal gain or whatever. I want to make this 100% clear, up until February 14, 2012, I had the utmost respect for Mayor Pat Fiacco, and thought the world of him. Yes, believe it or not, I looked up to the man. Many called me out for idolizing him, but I was of the belief that until I see with my own eyes what these others are seeing or have seen, I see no reason to not believe the public image that he was portraying. Or at least the public image that his polished PR team was portraying. I did not know who any of the other Fiacco's were, nor did I care. To me, he was Mayor Pat, 12 year Mayor of our great City. The one who could do no wrong, the one that changed the image of our great City from one of a dark and dingy, "smelly", City, to one that many folks were proud to call home.

February 14 came around, and at the time when I was planning to run for City Council in Ward 8 against Mike O'Donnell, Mayor Pat holds a press conference, assumably to announce he is running again. To the shock and awe of many, he announced that he was stepping down. (My personal views on this will be discussed in a later posting - which changed from this date to later in the campaign) That was when I realized that my passion for affecting change in a positive fashion might just have been given the Golden Opportunity! My wife and I sat down and discussed it long and hard, and within the next 48 hours, I had placed a phone call to Mayor Pat's office to request a meeting with him. Many from his "extended family" assume, incorrectly, that the only purpose of this meeting was to get his endorsement. While I agree that would have been nice, that was not the intent of this meeting, whatsoever. In fact, if they keep recordings of all phone calls to the Mayor's office, I would invite you to do a Freedom of Information request to listen to that very conversation. All I wanted to do was get Mr. Fiacco's feedback on what it was like to run for Mayor and be Mayor from both a personal and professional standpoint, and if there was any feedback he could provide to someone brand new on the scene, similar to how he was 12 years prior. I was not wanting that meeting to be anything more than simply more food for thought for my wife and I to consider.

Unfortunately, I didn't receive a response till many days later. In fact, it was two days after Michael Fougere announced his intentions to run, where also Mayor Pat announced his endorsement of him. Many say it was a given, I call it a premature decision, but a year later, it is quite obvious that this was his intent all along, for weeks if not months prior to that. Regardless of what you'd been fed through the Media up to that point, that was the reality of it. Unfortunate, but still, worth the meeting for his personal feedback, or so I thought. The Mayor's office called to tell me that my meeting would happen with him on March 7, 2012, which happened to be two days after my planned March 5 Press Conference. Over the next two weeks, my life was a living Hell. I had plans SET IN STONE to use the City Square Plaza for my "big announcement" and even had the approval (signatures and all) to bring my vehicle onto the Plaza for the announcement. Now, a year later, it's obvious to realize just why it was so important for me to include my vehicle. I was thrown roadblock after roadblock after roadblock by the City (the details are far too lengthy to get into in this blog post), and finally by March 1, 2012, I had enough. I decided to cancel my meeting with Mayor Fiacco, and told his office "If he wants to meet with me at a later date, he can, but the reason for my meeting with him is now pointless." - in other words, I had witnessed first hand just what that office was capable of (professional feedback) and what he thought of anyone daring to challenge the norm (personal feedback). 

There is much more I could go into right now, but that should be saved for a future posting. Suffice it to say, this was the beginning of my disgusting interactions with his Executive Assistant, Mr. Mark Rathwell, and still to that day, I didn't have a clue about any of the Fiacco family.

Have a great Regina day everyone!!

Stay tuned for Part Two - Discussing issues with the RPS and more!

City Council and the Media

Good afternoon Regina!!

After thinking about the way the media has been treating the past and current City Council, I couldn't help but recall some of the serious issues that our former mayor had with the media. This is most likely the reason a lot of Regina media outlets are afraid to ask the real tough questions of Mayor Fougere and others. Well, that is, until recently. I must give a big shout out to Sheila Coles and CBC for asking those really tough questions in her recent radio interviews with the Mayor; the ones that really no one else dares to ask. Also, to CTV Regina Morning Live, where I saw yesterday they didn't pussyfoot around the serious questions about the massive debt that Mayor Fougere wants to put on the taxpayers of Regina. (Current Debt = $82M -> Projected Debt = $450M - a 550% increase, and no guarantee that is the end of the debt)

If it weren't for those tough questions, the taxpayers might think that everything in Regina is all glorious, when in reality it is anything but. I think this is a good reason why my approach to the election last year was not well received, because a lot of people did not actually realize how serious the issues were that are present at City Hall and City Council. Here's hoping the rest of Regina Media become more willing to ask those necessary, albeit tough, questions that truly inform the residents of Regina. I would much rather financially support a media outlet that isn't presenting a skewed version of City Hall.

Thankfully, Prairie Dog has taken the hard nosed approach since day one, and I think that is one of the big reasons that I respect their paper, and their resident City Hall reporter, Paul Dechene. Below is Mr. Dechene's summary of Pat Fiacco's very public battles with the press. Well, only a few of them. Enjoy!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PAT VS. THE PRESS

Without a doubt, Pat Fiacco is a popular mayor. So popular that even the media seems to be in love with him sometimes. But has that general air of approval affected city journalism in this town?

Has Mayor Pat been given a pass by the media?

"There hasn't been a lot of really heavy scrutiny of his term," says Patricia Elliott, a journalism professor at the University of Regina. "You have these media chains who aren't that interested in giving resources to local coverage so there's a lot of understaffing for city coverage.

"But then you've also got a mayor who's famously thin-skinned and the city is a big advertiser," she continues. "And he's let his displeasure be known to many a publisher and editor when he doesn't like something he sees in the media. So I believe there's a tendency to back off or to show him support in the editorial pages."

Most will remember the Maclean's incident of 2007. After the magazine ran a story calling inner-city Regina Canada's worst neighbourhood, Fiacco was involved in the ambush and subsequent lecture of a reporter from the magazine, who'd been lured to the city by the promise of a neighbourhood ride-along.

Then there was a 2008 incident where Fiacco accused CBC reporter John Weidlich of giving him a single-figure salute at a press scrum. Weidlich was cleared of the charge by CBC.

And then there's Roger Currie, host of Access 7's Talk of the Town. He's also run afoul of Fiacco.

It all started during the autumn snow storm in 2010. City hall came under fire because residential streets were a total mess and city crews weren't clearing them fast enough. At the time, Currie was working at CKRM where he was doing daily commentaries.

"I wasn't there but Pat was doing a scrum," says Currie. "And people were asking him, 'What are you going to do about the residential streets?' And he looked at the camera and kind of smiled and said, 'I'm not hearing any complaints.'

"So I did a little thing about the whole issue and one line I threw in struck a chord, I guess. I said, 'Mr. Mayor, I think you should get out a little more often and not just go to fancy dinners and boxing events.'

"[Fiacco] didn't come to me at all. He went straight to the manager of the radio station. So I was called in and told this was perhaps inappropriate and maybe I should apologize. Which I did. But without a huge amount of sincerity.

"I thought it was a not a particularly venomous kind of shot. But I've never spoken to him since.

"And now I'm over at Access doing Talk of the Town and when the city budget came down, I sent a note to [Fiacco's senior advisor] Mark Rathwell asking if there was any chance the mayor might come on to talk about the budget. We went back and forth but the message was pretty clear that, no, hell would freeze first."

So between a reputedly prickly mayor's office and city beats that are under-supported, you wind up with a lot less serious digging going on at city hall.

"That's a problem for democracy," says Elliott. "That's why we get these lopsided elections where 85 per cent are in favour of him.

"Any time you see lopsided results like that, I think you have a media deficit or a democratic deficit at some point. Because nobody's perfect." /Paul Dechene (http://www.prairiedogmag.com/archive/?id=1129)

RPS Shooting & Social Media Backlash

 Good morning Regina!!! 

It's a beautiful Spring day outside, the sun is shining, the birds are chirping (in Florida), and all is happy in the world of social media! Okay, maybe the last bit there is far fetched, based on recent happenings on the Regina Police Service Facebook page. Personally, I am disgusted that there are people that would stoop to the level of posting some of the pretty disgusting comments/threats that they have. That said, it is the internet, and I can guarantee any of those that actually posted those comments on their wall, are high and mighty behind a computer screen, and would never consider saying that directly to anyone, including the RPS, in person. We all need to take a step back, breathe, and think before we post (myself included). Regardless of your personal views on this situation, please, respect that there are human beings behind that Facebook/Twitter, and they are only there to do their job. That is not enforcing the law, it is to interact with you and I, via a tremendous channel like Social Media. PLEASE don't ruin this opportunity by spoiling it and tainting it with these kind of personal attacks. I honestly believe if everyone waited a day or two before posting on there, none of those attacks would have happeend.

I want to first put out my heartfelt thanks to the Regina Police Service's Social Media Guru, she is one amazing, amazing person, who I feel should be respected and commended on her ability to put a friendly face to an organization that may otherwise be viewed at as "only" the bad guys that enforce the law. Remember, they are all human, they have families, they have feelings, and best of all, there are a good number of RPS members who are as down to earth as you and I, and only are there to do their job. Yes, I know there are issues with some select staff, that I have acknowledged in the past, and hopefully that gets handled by the RPS internally. It can only happen through complaints from you and I, though, so please, if you have to make a complaint, do it respectfully. You catch more flies with honey than you do vinegar, right?

I will quickly give you my thoughts on the actual situation at hand: the shooting of a family pet by an officer in the line of duty. Definitely food for thought. Who is telling the full story? Only time will tell. Unless you were there, of course, it's hard to judge. I think anyways. Officers have to make split second decisions at times, and sometimes they are the wrong ones. Was this a deliberate shooting, targetting that dog/owner? Highly, highly doubtful. Should the officers have done something other than shooting the dog? Most likely. Should we shame them for acting on their instincts? That's for the RPS and the courts to decide. With all that said, remember, they are human, they make mistakes. Sometimes, mistakes that can haunt them/us for a long, long time. I'm sure the officers involved have been shaken up by that experience itself, let alone the backlash afterwards. PLEASE take some time to let the RPS handle this investigation, and if necessary, an external investigation, to figure out exactly what happened there. Remember, there are always two sides to the story. Chances are, the truth/reality sits somewhere in the middle of those two.

Now, onto the Social Media aspect of this sad situation. Firstly, I want to say that I have personally dealt with this kind of behaviour for over a year now. Some of it through anonymous posts in a forum, some through Facebook, some through Twitter. I took my situation to the Regina Police Service in May 2012, which hindered a lot on what happened through Social Media. At that time, 3 out of the 4 officers I dealt with were tremendous and understanding. It was, sadly, the fourth officer, the one that actually took the complaint, that ruined my confidence in the RPS at that given time. Yes, I shouldn't let one bad apple affect the feelings of the entire organization, but I did at that time. Unfortunately, that officer did not take my complaint seriously, and chuckled at the thought of someone taking issue with something that happens "just on the internet". Since that day, I never brought forward any more of my concerns about this activity to the RPS, because of that one officer's actions. 

I know this may be considered mean to say, but really, I think this recent action is the best thing that could have happened to the Regina Police Service. Now, they finally see, firsthand, what can and does happen, often, on the internet where people think they can get away with anything, without consequences. Perhaps now, they might just take cases like mine much more seriously, and start actively pursuing a solution to minimize this kind of activity. You will probably never fully eliminate it, but cracking down on those that think they can do this, without consequences, certainly should help. I know that I am not the first, nor will I be the last, to experience online/cyberbullying. It is my wish to work with the RPS to address this very serious issue, and hopefully provide a common ground that can set a precedent for dealing with this activity.

I am currently in the process of working with a great local business that dealt with bullying, along with a great local organization that is working to combat bullying. It is my hope that we can all work together towards a common goal, because in the end, the problems are all the same. This is the time where I can channel any of that attention (positive or negative) from the election time towards a positive outcome. I have personally apologized to some great Regina folks on Twitter in the last day, and that is hopefully step one in a multi-step process.

Thank you for taking the time to read this, and please, feel free to leave constructive, clean criticism/comments all you wish.

Have a great Regina Day everyone!