Town of Comox spills raw sewage into Brooklyn Creek, doesn’t inform public

Town of Comox spills raw sewage into Brooklyn Creek, doesn’t inform public

by | Sep 24, 2021

Turbidity in Brooklyn Creek, with stormwater pipe creating a “waterfall” in the background. Kids sometimes play under this  |  Photos submitted by a Como resident

Town of Comox spills raw sewage into Brooklyn Creek, doesn’t inform public

By

Five months ago, I decided to take a break from publishing stories on Decafnation. It was a difficult decision because I enjoy journalism and there is such a dearth of enterprise reporting in the Comox Valley.

Several news events during this past half-year have tempted me to revive my regular reporting and commentary: Daniel Arbour’s bold and forward-thinking proposal about a future with fewer fossil fuel-powered vehicles and the recent federal election come to mind.

But today I stumbled onto a story that I couldn’t resist because it involves the ongoing degradation of local waterways by a municipality and a cadre of council members who chose to hide pertinent information from their constituents.

The story involves a major pollution event with potential public health concerns in the Town of Comox about which the public has not been informed.

One of the town’s sewage pipes recently broke and an unknown volume of raw sewage spilled into Brooklyn Creek, which flows through  Mack Laing Park and empties into the Comox Harbour. That created a health hazard for any children playing in the creek and at the creek’s Comox Bay estuary, and a potential lingering toxic environment for any returning fish this fall.

It also contributes to the contamination of shellfish in Comox Bay, which is under an ongoing harvesting ban.

None of the council members or town staff have discussed this sewage spill publicly or informed town residents. We couldn’t find any notice on the town’s website. And, of course, you won’t have read about it in any of the local media.

Decafnation reached out late afternoon Friday to Town Engineer Shelley Ashfield via email, who has not yet responded. We will update this story when and if Ashfield responds to our questions.

We asked Ashfield when and where the sewage break occurred and how the raw sewage could have flowed into Brooklyn Creek.

And it gets worse. On Thursday, the creek turned a milky brown color from somewhere south of Guthrie Road and covered the length of the creek to Comox Harbour. It appears, though this is not yet confirmed, that during mitigation measures following the raw sewage spill, the town dumped loads of gravel into the creek, stirring up sediment at the creek’s bottom and creating turbidity that took a long time to clear.

This also poses potential problems for wildlife.

We learned from a Comox resident that Kira Gallant of Environment Canada has an open file on issues regarding Brooklyn Creek and the Town of Comox. And that Dave Pridham, an officer with the BC Environment Ministry, is investigating both the raw sewage spill and the turbidity issue.

Decafnation has also learned that Brooklyn Creek Streamkeepers discovered dozens of dead salmon smolts along the waterway’s banks this summer. That could be linked to the fact the town discharges multiple stormwater drainage pipes into the creek, which diminishes its water quality, and also as a result of this summer’s heat domes created by climate change.

Suspected poor water quality in the creek has nearly wiped out healthy fish spawns in the creek in recent times. The creek’s headwaters begin in Courtenay, primarily Crown Isle, and pass through Area B en route to Comox, which creates a three-jurisdiction regulatory process. None of the three levels of government monitor the creek’s water quality.

The recent incident reinforces long-time concerns about the Town of Comox’s stormwater management practices. Decafnation published an intensive series of stories on this and related issues two years ago.

The town had ample warning that such a disaster could occur. But the town has ignored recommendations from multiple engineering consultants dating back more than two decades to upgrade its stormwater practices, including the building of detention ponds to filter toxic runoff before it enters sensitive waterways and regular collection of water quality data.

There is a pending BC Supreme Court case about the town’s handling of stormwater scheduled to begin next spring.

But Comox residents might question their elected council members why they didn’t inform the public about the raw sewage spill into the creek? Did they even know about the spill? If not, then who is providing oversight of town operations?

Some people believe the Town Council of Comox is the least transparent of all Comox Valley municipalities. You might think that council members heading into municipal elections in 2022 would be trying to change this perception.

This story has been updated to correct an error that Brooklyn Creek travels through Macdonald Wood Park.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

COMOX TOWN COUNCIL

Russ Arnott, Mayor: rarnott@comox.ca

Alex Bissinger: abissinger@comox.ca

Nicole Minions: nminions@comox.ca

Ken Grant: kgrant@comox.ca

Maureen Swift: mswift@comox.ca

Stephanie McGowan: smcgowan@comox.ca

 

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Enter your email address to subscribe to the Decafnation newsletter.

More

No Results Found

The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.

The Week: Doing it right on the wrong side of town, CVRD gets a good result for wrong reasons

The Week: Doing it right on the wrong side of town, CVRD gets a good result for wrong reasons

by | Mar 8, 2021

The Week: Doing it right on the wrong side of town, CVRD gets a good result for wrong reasons

By

As voters and taxpayers, we hope our elected officials always do the right thing for the right reasons.

The Comox Valley Regional District did the right thing last week by terminating its contract with the Comox Valley Economic Development Society (CVEDS). But they did it for the wrong reasons.

The Economic Development Society was a poorly run service that clothed itself in secrecy, reported to no one but a few self-appointed friends and spent a lot of money for questionable community benefit. And in doing so, the society managed to disappoint, frustrate and antagonize broad sectors of the Comox Valley community.

That was the right reason to terminate this contract.

Hornby and Denman islands and the Village of Cumberland pulled their financial support for the CVEDS service many years ago because those taxpaying elected officials realized how little value they were getting for their money.

Regional directors from Courtenay and Areas A and B might have gotten there, too, but they were making a good faith effort to transform CVEDS into a modern and more relevant organization through — for the first time ever — serious oversight.

But the CVEDS contract was not terminated for its obvious lack of performance. It wasn’t terminated because it had lost its way many years ago by spending almost a third of its budget on a seafood festival that added nothing to the economic sustainability of local businesses beyond a slight uptick in restaurant reservations.

The society’s contract wasn’t terminated because it often claimed responsibility for things on which it actually had minimal impact. It wasn’t terminated because the society shunned accountability or that it failed to comply with requirements under the Societies Act. Or that it had trouble managing its money.

No, the regional district terminated the CVEDS contract because Comox council members objected to increased oversight and scrutiny. Comox councillors didn’t like the regional board setting goals for the society that targeted current problems, such as affordable housing for low-wage employees and familys’ access to child care.

Comox Councillor Ken Grant summed it up when he lectured Courtenay Councillor Wendy Morin about how elected officials should manage arms-length societies.

“That’s the thing about the independent governance model, you don’t get to tell them how to do their business. That’s been the problem from day one,” Grant said at the Feb. 9 regional board meeting.

Grant couldn’t have been more wrong.

When a local government creates an organization — as the regional district did by forming CVEDS in 1988 — that exists only because it receives more than $1 million in public funds annually, then the elected officials absolutely get to say what they want for their money. In fact, taxpayers expect their elected officials to set the big picture goals and to hold people accountable for achieving them.

Grant was right about one thing. The independent governance model has been the problem from day one. Day one being back in 1988. Since then the society has happily taken the public’s $1 million-plus every year and did whatever it wanted with the money. Past elected officials didn’t seem to care what they did.

What is truly amazing is that this bad example of political oversight took so long to blow up.

 

But don’t celebrate just yet

Just because the contract for economic development services gets voided later this year doesn’t mean Comox Valley taxpayers are off the hook.

The regional district wrote CVEDS a $400,000 check in January. That’s one-half of its 2021 funding. The expectation is that the society will continue to fulfil the majority of their 2021 work plan items, including the ones the Town of Comox finds so distasteful.

But, of course, the regional district has no means of ensuring that all or even most of the work will get done satisfactorily. What recourse does the CVRD have? The contract will terminate on Aug. 26 whether the work gets done or not.

The second half of the $800,000 CVEDS 2021 budget is scheduled for July. Will they automatically get another $400,000 for their last two months? Not necessarily, according to CVRD Chief Administration Officer Russell Dyson.

“CVEDS has various commitments in place to deliver services for economic development, tourism and visitors services, and destination marketing. The termination notice provides service to CVEDS for eight of the 12 months in 2021, therefore the second payment for 2021 will consider any adjustments to annual allocation for this adjustment, noting that some costs are annual whether the contract is terminated part way through the year,” he told Decafnation via email.

Dyson confirmed that the regional district would not be responsible for any severance pay for CVEDS employees because they are not CVRD employees.

But Comox Valley taxpayers might become responsible for the Visitors Centre, which some people call the “drum” building and others call the White Elephant.

According to Dyson, “Upon the wind up of CVEDS, the net assets after payment of liabilities is transferred to CVRD and the participant member municipalities. The ongoing ownership and operation of the Visitors Centre will be a key consideration of the service participants in determining future service priorities.”

Dyson says the CVRD and municipal partners will be meeting and working with CVEDS staff the next few months to “encourage” that the work plan priorities are delivered and to encourage a smooth transition to a future service delivery determined through the service review.

“The second payment amount will be determined through this collaborative work over the next few months,” he said.

 

So what will rise from the ashes of CVEDS?

How will local governments provide destination marketing, handle visitor services, manage the hotel tax money and encourage economic vibrancy?

Given that Cumberland and the islands are doing just fine managing their own economic prosperity in-house — as most other communities on Vancouver Island already do — the ideal scenario now is that Courtenay and Comox will hire their own economic development officers.

The CVRD should also hire an economic officer to focus on the three electoral areas because it’s too easy for the rural areas’ needs to be overshadowed by the municipalities. They may all feel strongly about food security, but there are different projects that need to take place in different areas.

Then all four of the Valley’s economic development officers can meet monthly to share information and work together where it’s possible.

Meanwhile, all local governments should agree to share the contract for destination marketing and visitor services to Tourism Vancouver Island (about $260,000 per year). The City of Courtenay economic development officer should have input to Tourism Vancouver Island about how local MRDT funds are spent because all of that money comes from the city.

 

Every community’s needs will evolve over time

But no matter how our elected officials propose to meet those needs, they must always favour transparency and accountability and ensure their objectives are being met without favouritism and for the benefit of the greatest number of people.

 

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Enter your email address to subscribe to the Decafnation newsletter.

More
Regional District terminates CVEDS contract, opposing views were too entrenched

Regional District terminates CVEDS contract, opposing views were too entrenched

by | Mar 1, 2021

Decafnation archive photo

Regional District terminates CVEDS contract, opposing views were too entrenched

By

This story was updated March 2 to include a reaction from Area C Director Edwin Grieve. Comox Councillor Ken Grant and Comox Mayor Russ Arnott did not respond.

After almost a year of public discussions, in-camera meetings and mediated workshops that were often divisive, the Comox Valley Regional District will terminate its contract with the Comox Valley Economic Development Society on Aug. 26.

In an email to CVEDS Chair Deana Simkin sent Feb. 25, board Chair Jesse Ketler said the regional district was invoking Section 22 of the current service agreement signed just seven months ago on July 27. The section provides for early termination of the contract with six months notice.

A press release issued by the regional district this morning made the termination public knowledge.

The 33-year-old Economic Development Society will now almost certainly fold without a contract that provided local public funding in excess of $1.2 million annually in recent years in exchange for economic development and destination marketing services, and management of the Visitor’s Centre.

In this morning press release, Chief Administrative officer Russell Dyson said, “the CVRD with their municipal partners (City of Courtenay and Town of Comox) will continue reviewing the economic development service to provide a path forward on how economic development will be delivered within the region.”

One possible path that Comox Council has already discussed is for the town to hire its own economic development officer, as Cumberland did in 2016. Comox could still continue to participate in regional funding for destination marketing and Visitors Centre management.

Regional directors made the decision to terminate the contract at an in-camera session following the Feb. 9 full board meeting, which had become heated over the Economic Development Society’s 2021 work plan and budget.

The Comox Town Council has been at odds with the majority of regional district directors over how to manage the CVEDS contract and over its fundamentally opposing view about what constitutes economic development.

The board majority comprising directors from Courtenay and Electoral Areas A and B have pressed to make CVEDS more financially accountable and to modernize its view of what drives the local economy.

Comox Director Ken Grant made the Town Council’s position crystal clear at the Feb. 9 meeting.

“With all the angst around this, I don’t see any way how this relationship with CVEDS can continue,” he said. “So it’s time to cut our ties with CVEDS and stop pouring good money after bad.”

He said the society’s 2021 workplan included seven projects specifically requested by the board “that, in my opinion” have nothing to do with economic development. That’s taking us down a road our community really isn’t interested in.”

Those seven items included, among others, efforts to help create broader access to child care to enable women to return or enter the workforce and addressing the need for affordable housing to accommodate employees of local businesses.

Grant said the regional board has been “interjecting our decisions into their board … in an independent governance model you don’t get to tell them how to do their business,” he said. “That’s been the problem from day one.”

 

NOBODY WAS HAPPY

Comox Town Council wasn’t happy with the board’s new vision for economic development. The board majority wasn’t happy with how CVEDS operated, especially its lack of transparency and what it considered an outdated approach.

It appears both sides had become tired of the conflict.

Some observers believe Comox developed its own economic development strategy last year when the differences of opinion looked irreconcilable and they didn’t have the votes to prevail.

Town Chief Administration Officer Jordan Wahl recently spoke about hiring its own economic development officer as Cumberland did after withdrawing from the regional service five years

The town hired Lara Greasley, former CVEDS marketing manager, last year and now there is speculation they might hire CVEDS executive director John Watson.

That would leave Courtenay and the electoral areas to form their own economic development plan.

But there might still be room for a regional-wide destination marketing service and management of the Visitor’s Centre, both of which are currently under contract with Tourism Vancouver Island.

 

REACTION TO THE TERMINATION

Area A Director Daniel Arbour said the ongoing service review will allow the municipalities and rural areas to discuss how to support economic development in each respective community. He said it’s clear there are a variety of needs, some which may be best addressed in each jurisdiction, and some through regional collaboration.

“For Area A, CVEDS has worked primarily on the promotion of the shellfish sector for years. Without CVEDS, as chair of the Baynes Sound Ecosystem Forum, and AVICC local government representative on shellfish issues, I look forward to continue to grow the relationship with the businesses, BC Shellfish Association, and K’omoks First Nation on the promotion of sustainability initiatives in and around Baynes Sound,” he told Decafnation.

“Ultimately, in the years ahead, the most important economic consideration in Area A will be to properly manage growth in and around Union Bay, and to make thoughtful decisions around infrastructure requirements and integrated community planning,” he said.

Area B Director Arzeena Hamir said she has been advocating for more support for the farming sector ever since she was elected in 2018.

“Supporting farmers to increase their incomes per acre and create a vibrant food economy has always been at the forefront of my asks of our Economic Development Service. I hope to continue pushing for that,” she told Decafnation.

“I do also support more childcare places and I do see the direct connection between the vitality of the workforce and the ability of that workforce to return to work without having to worry about who is taking care of their kids,” she said.

Hamir added that she is looking forward to a transformed Economic Development Service.

“It’s been a long haul. We did try to work with CVEDS under the new contract but I felt we weren’t getting the deliverables we agreed to and CVEDS continued to make decisions (like the contract to Tourism Vancouver Island) without even informing the CVRD in advance,” she said.

Area C Director Edwin Grieve thanked the “incredible list” of volunteers who stepped up and donated so much of their time and expertise to serve on the CVEDS board. He noted past presidents Richard Hardy, Ian Whitehead, Justin Rigsby, Deana Simpkin. He also gave recognition to John Watson and Geoff, Lara, Arron and others from the staff that worked magic and doubled every public dollar.

“In this, as in so many Comox Valley endeavours, it was the volunteers, societies and not-for-profits that made this such a great place to live,” he told Decafnation. 

 

WHAT’S NEXT

It was the Comox Council that unanimously voted to request a formal review of the economic development service. That review with a hired consultant began on Jan. 17 but has so far resulted in only one in-camera meeting, which primarily focused on the process and procedures for the review.

The next meeting of the review committee is scheduled for mid-March but does not appear on the regional district’s website because they have closed the meetings to the public.

The review committee comprises representatives from Courtenay, Comox, the three electoral areas and the regional board chair.

 

 

 

 

Read Decafnation’s extensive coverage of the Economic Development Society, it’s history and how the shifting political climate foreshadowed its demise 

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Enter your email address to subscribe to the Decafnation newsletter.

More

No Results Found

The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.

Comox respondents’ Comments

by | Feb 11, 2021

These are the written comments made by Comox residents who participated in Decafnation’s Local Government Performance Review. Comments that breached our journalistic standards, such as ad hominem attacks, have been eliminated. All other comments appear as entered into the online survey platform. Click on each image to view that councillor’s satisfaction rating.

Comox Town Council

⇒ Pepole are doing their best under the circumstances

⇒ I am frustrated that the council is not taking climate change seriously and how it will affect our town. That and the way they’ve handled Mack Laing and the development of the marina area.

⇒ They rolled up their sleeves, and got to work. They made a long overdue decision to show Richard Kanigan the door. The new CAO is a breath of fresh air. They are progressive and logical in their governance. Bravo!

⇒ Comox Town Council has continued to demonstrate a backward position towards conservation of municipal nature parks (e.g. Mack Lang Park) and an uncooperative approach towards a regional park management plan.

⇒ The council has made it clear that the priority of their mandate is to ensure that they are paid very well for having been elected.

⇒ They are too secretive about the budget and give no details about how they’re spending tax dollars, or how they are arriving at these decisions.

⇒ Council’s position on Shakesides and the Mack Laing property has been appalling.

⇒ 1) The consistency of garbage pickup has fallen since Arndt arrived. 2) Cycling is still a hazardous adventure, Noel, Lazo etc etc 3) No publicly available info on likely sea level rise in Comox, I was told to ask a realtor 4) inability to play nicely with our neighbours in Cumberland and Courtenay 5) no linkage of essential services , hospital beds for example, to palms for further development. 6) Poor air quality in winter. 7) people can still swim in our drinking water and log to close

⇒ The Council’s failure to honour the OCP, institute a Heritage Registry and legislation to protect local heritage sites and structures, insist on the inclusion of green space and adequate parking for new commercial and multi residential development, foster the protection of existing green spaces and parks as well as having a plan to acquire additional green space areas and especially having no apparent concept of climate change and the urgency of an adaptive plan for the fast arriving future have left me very dissatisfied this this councils performance.

⇒ Not enough has been done to address climate change, poor air quality in the winter months.

⇒ Election promises have been broken, respect for previous OCP has been lacking in follow through, lack of a heritage registry and building permits without proper parking allocations are issues. Using OCP designated parkland space to sell for a building site and not honouring an almost 40 year old trust agreement with Mack Laing are also issues for me. I could go on

⇒ I feel like the council is more of a boys club who would never stand up to the leader. I do not trust them.

⇒ Too little attention to taxpayer’s needs. Too much attention to individual council members “agendas”. It is a fact those least competent to govern are those most attracted to such offices.

⇒ Tough job, especially following the former Mayor and Town Administrator. Think the new council has terrific new people doing a hard job, and having to learn an awful lot on the job!

⇒ Local improvements for schools (e.g. Brooklyn Crosswalk) are very much appreciated. Happy with backyard chickens and food security progressive policies. The traffic calming steps in local neighborhoods are also appreciated.

⇒ They ignore the needs of youth and families in Comox. Apart from Marina Park and school playgrounds, there is nothing. We need a skate park and some spaces for 7-12 yro. And stop fighting over Shakesides and honour the original contract as intended by Mack Laing!!

⇒ I appreciate that the Comox Council has not embraced the panic of Covid and maintained an even keel thus far.

⇒ A Lot of things feel very progressive which is good, and on the other hand sometimes it feels like Comox is intentionally at odds with other municipalities and I wonder if that is necessary.

⇒ First thing they did was give themselves a raise. Garbage pickup is erratic and now less days per year pick up.

⇒ Comprising a majority of first time councillors, the group, I thought would bring a fresh perspective. I am afraid that in spite of moving from ‘an old boys network’ style of government, we have, instead, moved to one that gets mired in the minutia being on the side of political correctness.

⇒ I would like to see them put more work into prioritizing supporting local businesses and contributing to an affordable homeownership strategy

⇒ Lack of action taken, schedule change to garbage poorly handled

⇒ Mostly pretty good

⇒ There seems to be little effort to engage the community in preparing for the consequences of global warming.

⇒ They seem unfocused and leaderless. They seem to follow without thinking for themselves.

⇒ After spending the last couple of hours reviewing the minutes of the Town of Comox Council meetings I am left with the impression that the people who make the decisions and run the Town are Jordan Wall, Marvin Kamenz and Clive Freundlich. The mayor and council are essentially trained seals that nod in unison to the directions they are given by senior staff. 99% of all motions are carried without opposition. The role of the mayor and council members is primarily public relations. They justify their salaries by attending meetings hosted by special interest groups seeking council support and public money for their organizations. The Town of Comox has approved three large developments (695 Aspen Road, 2310 Guthrie, and 2309 McDonald road) without ensuring adequate recreational park space for residents. This has placed enormous strain on existing park space in the Comox Valley. The only economic development that the Town of Comox has supported is the mall renovation (Dollar Store) along with 3 pubs and 2 cannabis stores. While increasing taxes, they have cut back services (e.g., waste and recycling pick up to once every two weeks.) Their major contribution to the climate emergency and the environment was to ban plastic bags, build a couple of electric vehicle charging stations and approve the BC step code.

⇒ This Council is unable to think outside of the box that it built for itself. Because a number of the councilors are new to their positions, they seem unwilling to act or oppose the direction of the Council set by those who have past experience.

⇒ Their handling of the redevelopment planning for 1652 Balmoral was shockingly poor. I, along with almost all of the other neighbors provided similar feedback (not NIMBY, but lots of reasonable input provided on the circumvention of the OCP as well as design out of alignment, all ignored in the name of speed)

Ken Grant

⇒ He’s not a team player and not transparent-a detriment to the council

⇒ The dinosaur in the room. Only in office for the paycheque.

⇒ Ken Grant is not much better than Russ Arnott in his paternalistic governance approach to the municipal electorate.

⇒ Councillor Ken Grant has done absolutely nothing to forward the actual needs of the taxpayers of the Town Of Comox. They after all only pay the council wages, (and bonuses, and expenses and…)

⇒ Voted for demolition of Shakesides and to continue designing a viewing platform to replace naturalist Mack Laing’s heritage home, rejecting any other proposals for the property,

⇒ Too dismissive of the female voices on Council.

⇒ Ken Grant’s jokes and comments are disrespectful. He is part of the “Old Boy’s Network “ of the last Council. He seems opposed to any substantial changes to Council’s past performance

⇒ Needs improvement. More governing less politicking.

⇒ Old guard

⇒ Mr. Grant, whose experience on council is welcome. He unfortunately also brings, I believe, baggage from the previous ‘old boys’ style of governance in the valley. I would vote for him again

⇒ It’s possible he’s been around too long

⇒ Ken Grant seems to represent the White male status quo.

⇒ Seems to parrot whatever Art Meyers feeds him.

⇒ Ken Grant just managed to get enough votes to be elected at the last election. His suggestion to increase the hotel tax from 2% to 3% in response to a request for additional funding for the homeless speaks volumes about Ken Grant’s character and abilities. Sadly, his friend and fellow incumbent, Russ Arnott, ensures that Ken Grant is the council member appointed to represent Comox at the CVRD.

 

Alex Bissinger

⇒ A breath of fresh air. She is articulate and willing to listen. Her views on climate change and sustainability as well as her ideas on future capital projects are well informed with an eye to the future.

⇒ The smartest person in the room. Fearless and always happy to keep people accountable. Top shelf councillor.

⇒ I had high hopes for Alex Bissinger as a progressive new voice on town council, but have been somewhat disappointed. She has backed off from pressing for real change, such as resolving the Mack Lang nature park trust, and bringing the municipal engineering department into progressive environmentally responsible professional management.

⇒ Councillor Alex Bissinger has done absolutely nothing to forward the actual needs of the taxpayers of the Town Of Comox. They after all only pay the council wages, (and bonuses, and expenses and…)

⇒ Cannot say I’m impressed, but she hasn’t done anything terrible either. A bit disappointing for someone of her intellectual ability.

⇒ Voted to continue designing a viewing platform to replace naturalist Mack Laing’s heritage home, rejecting any other proposals for the property,

⇒ Councillor Bissinger has made a real effort to initiate some progressive and meaningful initiatives. Her strong awareness of the seriousness of climate change is appreciated as was her initial attempt to resolve the councils previous inability to honour it’s legal responsibility to uphold the terms of the Mack Laing trust. It’s disappointing and disquieting to see the “cone of silence” descend on her initial support for addressing this issue.

⇒ Bright and articulate woman who seeks innovative ways of addressing problems. It would be great if her voice was not stifled by males on Council.

⇒ Alex has brought several issues and motions to Council to promote meaningful changes or dialogue. She often misses the support she needs and can be overwhelmed by the “status quo” supporters to change her wording, table motions, etc. Lots of potential for meaningful changes

⇒ Needs improvement. More governing less politicking.

⇒ Alex is a true member of the community. She does this because she cares about Comox and the people that live here.

⇒ Ms. Bissinger, whom I thought would bring youth and pragmatism (an engineer), has, I think, not been able to bridge the gap between idealism and realism. Ms. Bissenger and Comox, may benefit from her being on council for another term.

⇒ Needs to do more to leave her mark.

Patrick McKenna

⇒ Interesting ideas about arts and culture and performing spaces

⇒ Pat McKenna has maintained a low profile and generally goes with the flow.

⇒ Councillor Pat McKenna, though sometimes a lone voice, has occasionally spoken up to question council decisions.

⇒ He has done nothing of note.

⇒ It’s hard to tell what councillor McKenna actually stands for.

⇒ A team player who has great communication skills and takes the time to analyze the issue at hand.

⇒ I’m convinced Pat could help Council expand possibilities for our Community. He speaks up well for issues he’s concerned about. Unfortunately he often supports the status quo team as well.

⇒ Mr. McKenna, in my view, was the star on Comox Council. I believe that he showed measured independence and moderation. I witnessed his thoughtful and mature questioning and his attention to the job at hand. I would definitely vote for him again and support his effort to be our mayor if he so chooses.

⇒ I love that Pat brings knowledge of housing and homelessness issues to Comox Council.

⇒ I think the difference between what he said while running and how he has voted are significantly different.

⇒ Pat is a nice guy. But that’s about it.

⇒ I have been disappointed by McKenna’s “let’s-not-rock-the-boat” attitude. I wonder if, somehow, his leadership of a local non-profit makes him overly cautious about standing up with the more progressive arm of Council.

⇒ Only councilor that I’ve dealt with first hand who seemed to ready to make the hard decisions and do the work that I would expect from elected officials

Mayor Russ Arnott

⇒ His position on climate change, sustainability and developing marina lands are lacking. And his stand on Mack Laing.

⇒ He is a down to earth, approachable leader. He stood up for his Public Works staff when an awful fabricated story broke about interactions with the female public. His love for Comox is obvious….he cares about people.

⇒ Russ Arnott continues to display a reactionary governance approach to municipal services delivery, male chauvinism towards female councilors, and an adversarial approach towards citizen activists and non-profit advisory groups.

⇒ Mayor Arnott is careful to ensure that he makes absolutely no decision that would bring any sort of controversy. He will not make a decision that would actually take any kind of stand for anything.

⇒ He is merely parroting the previous administration and has not seemed to do much of anything. He has not been a positive factor in solving a very large – and legally expensive – outstanding issue – namely the Shakesides Trust. There is too much secrecy around this,

⇒ Failed to consult with KFN re: demolition of Shakesides.

⇒ Mayor Arnott’s disruptive and coercive interjections during council meetings to promote his own agenda is unacceptable.

⇒ He seems to have the greatest power in Council rather than sharing it with his Councillors.

⇒ The mayor’s behaviour in council meetings has been interruptive and non respectful to public speakers and his newer council members. He has not attempted to follow OCP guidelines. Though he campaigned on a community ocean walkway, he allowed property to sell that was designated park space and reassured the new buyer that the public walkway space adjacent to his land and Port Augusta Creek would not ever happen. He is a former member of council who continues to block resolution of a 40-year-old Trust that could have created a gem for Comox such as Campbell River has achieved with both the Sybil Andrews House and the Haig Brown house and property. He continues to block Heritage Registry for Comox, at a great loss for the community.

⇒ I have had 2 dealings with Arnott and found him pompous, arrogant and dismissive.

⇒ Needs improvement. More governing less politicking.

⇒ Believe Russ is doing a decent job, it is a hard job and he has had to try and clean up some of the mess left by the former Mayor and Adm.

⇒ Old guard

⇒ Russ does not hesitate to seek advice and input from constituents on major matters.

⇒ Does he listen to council members?

⇒ Mr. Arnot brings a steady and firm presence to the group. I hope that he can remain so. I would vote for him again.

⇒ Nothing stands out positive or negative.

⇒ He seemed to be bullying the young(er) women on Council at one point.

⇒ Seems woefully under qualified to lead.

⇒ Arnott is typical of a small-town, glad-handing, baby-kissing, superficial, vacuous politician. He has no vision for the future of this community and no idea how to deal with the enormous future challenges facing the community including economic development, affordable housing and climate change adaptation. After approving a 14% raise for himself in 2018 he is now seeking a further increase. In my opinion he isn’t worth the salary he is already receiving. The simple truth is his absence from council would have no impact whatsoever except to save the community more than $50,000.

⇒ While some experience on Council is good (see my comments to previous question), the lack of creative thinking by this mayor is beyond the pale. It’s all about the economy and growing the tax base, which will see all the local municipalities behind the curve as our climate and the pandemic (both related to each other) set the stage in the future.

Maureen Swift

⇒ Not a team player. Incapable of making her own decisions.

⇒ Needs to learn from the other women on council and get progressive.

⇒ Maureen Swift represents the elitist lobby of entitlement of the wealthy in Comox, where housing development, parks management, and municipal services delivery are there to serve the well-off establishment of Comox.

⇒ Councillor Maureen Swift has done absolutely nothing to forward the actual needs of the taxpayers of the Town Of Comox. They after all only pay the council wages, (and bonuses, and expenses and…)

⇒ Not a positive influence on any issue of importance, and often very negative about what should be of benefit to the town – growing attractions that will encourage tourism.

⇒ Voted for demolition of Shakesides

⇒ Seems to be committed to maintaining the status quo of the previous councils culture and lack of vision.

⇒ Focusing on an off leash dog park is not a top priority yet this issue still hasn’t been resolved after 2 years.

⇒ Maureen Swift is also past Counsellor with an apparent agenda to preserve the status quo without substantial changes. Many missed opportunities to be a more progressive council.

⇒ Needs improvement. More governing less politicking.

⇒ Old guard

⇒ Ms. Swift brings experience and a woman, who has managed to survive in the former, less diversified governance in the valley. I likely would vote for her again.

⇒ She seems to “go with the flow.”

⇒ Maureen Swift has been a councillor for long enough. No doubt she is an active member of the Comox community and takes her role as councillor seriously. However, the time has come for Maureen to pass the baton to someone with fresh ideas.

Nicole Minions

⇒ So so. She doesn’t stand out. Her views on amalgamation and air quality are limited. She tends to follow the middle road.

⇒ Good community person. Needs a dash of Bissinger’s fearlessness.

⇒ Nicole tries to improve municipal governance but has been overwhelmed and bullied by the municipal council old guard and its parochial administration.

⇒ Councillor Nicole Minions has done absolutely nothing to forward the actual needs of the taxpayers of the Town Of Comox. They after all only pay the council wages,(and bonuses, and expenses and…)

⇒ Again, does not speak out and seems to have very little opinion about anything.

⇒ Voted against designing a viewing platform to replace naturalist Mack Laing’s heritage home, was in favour of exploring other options

⇒ Councillor Minions is a welcome addition to this council. She has attempted to initiate some progressive ideas to the council despite the older members of the council’s entrenched resistance to considering new ideas. It’s disappointing that her initial support for a meaningful attempt to resolve the town’s situation in regards to the Mack Laing Trust has been silenced.

⇒ Collaborative with others and frequently seen trying to understand the issues at hand.

⇒ Nicole has a clear voice for advocating principles or ideas. She seems also the most responsive member to expressed concerns from locals. Good at dialogue.

⇒ Needs improvement. More governing less politicking.

⇒ Ms. Minion, another rookie on Council for whom I voted also disappointed me. Perhaps as a young working mother, the workload may have been too much. If Ms. Minion chooses to run again, I would vote for her in the hopes that on a more enlightened and experienced council, she would be able to bring her voice to the table.

⇒ I was at a Town Council meeting where she said electric vehicles and charging stations were a passion of hers. That was reassuring as it suggested to me that she takes global warming seriously.

⇒ I had higher hopes for her and she hasn’t seemed to gain her legs.

⇒ Of all of the current councillors, Nicole Minions is probably the most logical choice for the replacement (hopefully) of Russ Arnott at the next election. She is smart, has a business background and has been involved as a community volunteer. Even early in her first term, Nicole showed leadership by championing the disposable plastic bag issue. Her financial background gives her a solid grasp of Town finances. It is unfortunate that she hasn’t spoken up more about some of the questionable expenditures being made by the Town.

⇒ The same qualities mentioned above regarding Bissinger can be applied to Minions, without the science and data background. She stands up to the trio of “experienced’ councilors, but is hamstrung by her newness to the position. Still, she is doing the best she can, I think, and is showing signs, like Bissinger, of standing up and being counted as a progressive and a person concerned about the climate and pandemic.

Stephanie McGowan

⇒ Don’t have a clear picture. Her position on tax increases was interesting- partnering up with other levels of gov’t to save dollars and her other responses re transparency( town hall meetings) and future projects were general. She supported Comox signing on to the BC Climate Action Charter.

⇒ She has also tried for the best but is usually bullied into submission.

⇒ Councillor Stephanie McGowan, though sometimes a lone voice, has occasionally spoken up to question council decisions…

⇒ She at least tries to address concerns of Comox citizens, but is often overridden by the others, who it seems are only interested in making as few waves as possible.

⇒ Voted against designing a viewing platform to replace naturalist Mack Laing’s heritage home, was in favour of exploring other options

⇒ Councillor McGowan has been a welcome addition to the council. Hopefully she will be successful in helping the town create a Heritage Registry and some protective bylaws to protect the town’s heritage properties and structures. Her initial support for a meaningful effort to resolve the Towns current impasse in regard to the Mack Laing Trust was appreciated. Hopefully the ember of that vision still remains.

⇒ Bringing forth the issue of homelessness and how it exists in Comox too.

⇒ Stephanie has great intentions in my opinion but again , can be overwhelmed by the blocking of change from the senior more experienced members of council. Good potential for future changes I think. She keeps bringing up the need for a heritage registry- yay and has a broader perspective of community members.

⇒ Needs improvement. More governing less politicking.

⇒ She’s engaged in important issues

⇒ I thought that Ms. McGowan, in spite of me not voting for her, was a disappointment and not good material for Comox Council. Too mired in idealistic beliefs for the level of responsibility. I would not vote for her.

⇒ I don’t have a sense of her politics.

⇒ Stephanie is best described as the “heart” of Comox Council. She cares about the “average Joe or Josephine”. She also cares about Comox history and our relationship to the K’omoks First Nation. Like the other novice councillors, Stephanie’s voice has been drowned out by the three former incumbents. She is not one to rock the boat and tends to conform to the direction being taken by the more dominant councillors.

Courtenay says it’s satisfied with City Council, different story in Comox, survey finds

Courtenay says it’s satisfied with City Council, different story in Comox, survey finds

by | Feb 11, 2021

The next municipal elections are scheduled for Oct. 15, 2022. That’s just 20 months away.

Courtenay says it’s satisfied with City Council, different story in Comox, survey finds

By

First of two parts

Comox Valley residents who participated in a Local Government Performance Review say they are generally satisfied with the performance of the Courtenay City Council and the Comox Valley Regional District board of directors. But they are mostly dissatisfied with the Comox Town Council.

With about a year-and-a-half to the next municipal elections, Decafnation conducted the survey over the last few weeks to measure how satisfied voters were with the performance of the councillors, directors and trustees they elected in 2018.

In addition to the distinctly different opinions about the Courtenay and Comox councils, the survey also found that when respondents were satisfied with most of their individual elected officials, they also approved of the whole council’s performance.

For example, the regional board directors in areas A and B received very high approval ratings and those electoral area respondents also expressed a corresponding satisfaction with the regional district board. In electoral area C, however, where most respondents said they were dissatisfied with their regional director, they were also less satisfied with the regional board as a whole.

Twice as many Courtenay residents said they are satisfied with their city council than dissatisfied. That level of satisfaction transcended all age groups

Among the Comox Valley’s 33 elected officials reviewed in the survey, Electoral Area A Director Daniel Arbour received the highest approval rating. Eighty-nine percent of his constituents said they were satisfied or very satisfied with his performance. Courtenay Councillor Doug Hillian had the second-highest rating at 68 percent and Electoral Area B Director Arzeena Hamir was third with a 65 percent approval rating.

Few of the 314 respondents to the survey indicated a strong interest in District 71 school board matters.

When asked how satisfied they were with school board trustees, in most cases the respondents chose the mid-point (neither satisfied nor dissatisfied), a response that usually indicates a lack of knowledge or a lack of interest. The written comments about school trustees point to both. 

And too few people responded from the Village of Cumberland to provide the data for meaningful analysis, although 80 percent of the villagers who did respond were decidedly satisfied or very satisfied.

It is interesting that roughly 20 percent of respondents felt neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with their councils and individual councillors. This may not be surprising given that a large majority of eligible voters were not sufficiently interested in local government to cast a ballot in the 2018 civic elections.

The survey also asked respondents to identify the top issues elected officials should address before voters go back to the polls on Oct. 15 of next year.

Although the list of top issues varied by Comox Valley jurisdiction, it was clear that respondents overall rated affordable housing as the number one issue. Traffic congestion and various other transportation issues collectively ranked second.

Comox respondents over age 55 were more dissatisfied with their town council than younger residents.

In the survey, Decafnation invited people to rate their level of satisfaction with the Comox Valley’s four local governments as well as their individual municipal, school district and Island Trust elected officials. The survey was conducted over a three-week period via Survey Monkey and the results independently analyzed by several community volunteers not associated with Decafnation.

Respondents could choose among five levels: very satisfied, satisfied, neither satisfied or dissatisfied, dissatisfied and very dissatisfied. For this story, in most instances, we have combined the top two satisfied ratings and also the bottom two dissatisfied ratings. We refer to the results as ‘satisfied,’ ‘neutral’ or ‘dissatisfied.’

Many of the survey respondents included written comments to help explain their satisfaction ratings. These can be found elsewhere on the Decafnation website starting today with Courtenay and Comox. The comments help to explain and interpret the respondents’ satisfaction levels.

This article takes a close look at the results for Courtenay and Comox. Readers can click all images for enlargement.

 

CITY OF COURTENAY

Twice as many survey respondents from Courtenay said they are satisfied (55%) with their city council than dissatisfied (27%). And that sentiment was mirrored in respondents’ impression of individual council members.

That level of satisfaction also transcended all age groups. Respondents who are 54 years old and younger had approximately the same satisfaction level as those over age 55.

How satisfied are you with the Courtenay City Council? — click to enlarge

Respondents in age groups from 18 to 54 were satisfied (59%) and dissatisfied (30%), while respondents in the age groups from 55 to 65-plus were satisfied (54%) and dissatisfied (26%).

Many of the respondents’ comments praised specific council action.

“I am relieved the council was not taken in by 3L Developments, and also that it supports the bike/pedestrian bridge to 6th St. I do wish the council would consider more green space for every new development. Everyone needs a small area of greenery, preferably a few trees and flowering bushes, a bench or two, whether for a lunch break or just to rejuvenate.”

Mayor Bob Wells received a 53 percent satisfied rating, compared with 26 percent who were dissatisfied with his performance. The percentage who gave him the top ‘very satisfied’ rating (18%) was about the same as the council as a whole (20%) and all other council members except for Manno Theos (9%).

Wells received both praise and criticism from survey participants.

You can read all the comments about city councillors and the council itself here.

“It’s a difficult job trying to lead the way and find common priorities to address civic issues and sustain a vision of an inclusive community that values people of all income groups/ages. He (Mayor Wells) hears what people say! He seems to work at building consensus when possible,” said one respondent.

But some respondents disapproved of his communication style.

“Never hear from the guy,” said one. While others said, “Never hear from him except when he is at a public function with a high attendance,” and “I have sent him a few emails and have yet to receive a reply! Not even an acknowledgement.”

Courtenay respondents were most satisfied with Councillor Doug Hillian, who got a 68 percent satisfied rating, with 44 percent rating his performance at the top very satisfied level.

Hillian’s very satisfied level ranked higher than all other Comox Valley council members. Only Electoral Area A Director Daniel Arbour (60% very satisfied) and Electoral Area B Director Arzeena Hamir (58% very satisfied) eclipsed his 44 percent mark.

One respondent said Hillian was the council’s “Elder statesman. Eloquent. Ever diplomatic. Grateful to have him.”

Another person wrote, “Councillor Hillian is very knowledgeable and experienced, he’s empathetic, cares about the environment and related issues, and is responsive to taxpayers.”

Manno Theos was the only city councillor to receive an overall dissatisfied rating (41%). Although 32 percent of respondents said they were satisfied.

What are the top issues council should address? — click to enlarge

“I have always felt that of all councillors, Manno is the least invested in helping the little guy and the most invested in watching out for larger money sources. It is good to have a counter-voice to balance the primarily progressive council, but I feel he is less invested in meetings and he often sounds distracted behind the zoom camera and has less in-depth comments.” said one respondent.

Respondents gave similar approval ratings to the remainder of the council members. They also received mostly positive comments.

Will Cole-Hamilton (52% satisfied) was called the “Best of the bunch. True leader. Could be more influential and “not as nice” when driving the necessary culture changes at City Hall.”

A respondent commented that Wendy Morin (52% satisfied) has “A lot of heart and insight which has at times been sorely lacking on council.”

 

A respondent said Melanie McCollum (48% satisfied) “is a very good listener and … also seems to give issues a lot of thought and, so far at least, she looks for ways to resolve long-standing problems such as unhealthy air quality in the Valley due to overuse of woodsmoke. I see her as promising and hope she lasts.”

More than one respondent mentioned David Firsch’s (47% satisfied) impact on the cycling community. “I think he has some good ideas. He is definitely a positive for the cycling people in Courtenay.”

Courtenay residents who took the survey said affordable housing (62%) was by far the most important issue for the council to address before the 2022 elections. Completing the city’s update of its Official Community Plan was second at 52 percent, followed by economic development (49%) and traffic congestion and/or parking (48%).

It was interesting to note that respondents nixed the idea of annexation or otherwise expanding city boundaries. Only 3 percent of respondents ranked it as an important issue.

“Council needs to build a consensus for new initiatives flowing from the OCP. ‘Building back Better’ will require engaging the community from the neighbourhood up instead of ‘top down’ policies. Support for Neighborhood Associations is one way to start engaging people where they live. Staff will need reorienting to community engagement. Add a Community Development function of Social Planning and coordinate with agencies,” said one respondent.

 

TOWN OF COMOX

Almost half of the Comox respondents (49%) said they are dissatisfied with the performance of their Town Council, while a third expressed satisfaction (33%). And only 10 percent said they were very satisfied.

But that level of dissatisfaction did not transcend all age groups among Comox respondents as it did in Courtenay. Younger Comox residents surveyed said were much more satisfied with their council’s performance than the older residents.

How satisfied are you with the Comox Town Council? — click to enlarge

Comox respondents in age groups from 18 to 54 were mostly satisfied (57%) and only 19 percent were dissatisfied. But in the older age groups, those trends were reversed. Respondents in the age groups from 55 to 65-plus were largely dissatisfied (70%). Only 17 percent of this older age group said they were satisfied.

Respondents noted the reasons for their overall dissatisfaction with Comox Council in the written comments. You can read all the comments here.

“This Council is unable to think outside of the box that it has built for itself. Because a number of the councilors are new to their positions, they seem unwilling to act or oppose the direction of the Council set by those who have past experience.,” said one respondent.

“Election promises have been broken, respect for previous OCP has been lacking in follow through, lack of a heritage registry and building permits without proper parking allocations are issues. Using OCP designated parkland space to sell for a building site and not honouring an almost 40-year-old trust agreement with Mack Laing are also issues for me. I could go on,” said another.

But there were some less critical comments. “People are doing their best under the circumstances,” said one person.

Respondents gave Mayor Russ Arnott an approval rating similar to the council as a whole: 48 percent said they were dissatisfied with his performance while 24 percent were satisfied. In the extreme ratings, 10 percent said they were very satisfied with Arnott and 20 percent were very dissatisfied.

Arnott had the highest dissatisfaction rating of all council members and the respondents’ comments reflected this.

“The mayor’s behaviour in council meetings has been interruptive and not respectful to public speakers and his newer council members. He has not attempted to follow OCP guidelines … He is a former member of council who continues to block resolution of a 40-year-old Trust that could have created a gem for Comox such as Campbell River has achieved with both the Sybil Andrews House and the Haig Brown house and property. He continues to block a Heritage Registry for Comox, at a great loss for the community,” said one respondent.

But there were other opinions, too. “He is a down-to-earth, approachable leader. He stood up for his Public Works staff when an awful fabricated story broke about interactions with the female public. His love for Comox is obvious. He cares about people,” said another person.

At the other end of the scale, first-term Councillor Nicole Minions topped council members with a 53 percent approval rating, 23 percent of respondents giving her the top level rating of very satisfied.

“Councillor Minions is a welcome addition to this council. She has attempted to initiate some progressive ideas to the council despite the older members of the council’s entrenched resistance to considering new ideas. It’s disappointing that her initial support for a meaningful attempt to resolve the town’s situation in regards to the Mack Laing Trust has been silenced,” said one respondent.

Another first-term councillor, Alex Bissinger posted the second-highest satisfied rating (49%) and had the highest percentage (34%) of very satisfied respondents. Stephanie McGowan, also in her first-term, received a 41 percent satisfied rating.

Respondents kept Councillor Patrick McKenna in positive territory with a 34 percent satisfied rating, although he had the highest dissatisfied rating (19%) of the four newcomers on the council and the highest indifferent rating (47%).

Councillors Ken Grant and Maureen Swift received mostly dissatisfied ratings at 43 percent and 36 percent respectively. Grant got the lowest satisfied rating (19%) of all Comox council members.

“Ken Grant’s jokes and comments are sexist and disrespectful. He is part of the “Old Boy’s Network “ of the last Council. He seems opposed to any substantial changes to Council’s past performance,” said one respondent.

“Ken Grant seems to represent the white male status quo,” said another.

What are the top issues council should address? — click to enlarge

Comox residents who responded to the survey said the top two issues for the town to address are climate change (50%) and resolving the Mack Laing Trust issue (50%)

Taxation and municipal finance issues and affordable housing were both important to 42 percent of respondents. Economic development was important to less than a third of respondents (32%).

The comments made by survey participants reflected these issues.

“Comox town council’s continued obstruction and delay towards responsibly resolving the Mack Lang Trust debacle is a municipal disgrace,” said one respondent.

“There’s a general lack of discussion on this town about how poorly developed the waterfront is. There’s a huge opportunity here and we have great waterfront doctors offices (which is a complete waste). It should be filled with waterfront restaurants, cafes and hotels. Again, some vision is seriously lacking here. Also a boardwalk connecting marina park to goose spit park should be a thing,” said another.

And this, “We don’t need hotdog stands on the marina park pier, nor do we need any more empty buildings. keep up the splash park, enhance the boat launch area, and, as has been promised for years, build a walkway along the shore like almost every other waterfront community on Vancouver Island. It’s embarrassing,” said a respondent.

Next time, we look at the survey results for the Comox Valley Regional District and the three electoral areas. We’ll also review the satisfaction levels of the Denman and Hornby Island representatives to the Islands Trust and District 71 school board trustees.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HOW YOU RATED COURTENAY, COMOX COUNCILLORS

 

READ YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT COUNCILS AND COUNCILLORS ON THE SURVEY HOME PAGE

 

 

 

RESPONDENTS AGE GROUPING BY JURISDICTION

 

 

 

SURVEY RESPONDENTS BY GOVERNMENT JURISDICTION

 

 

 

COMOX SATISFACTION LEVEL FOR UNDER & OVER AGE 55 RESPONDENTS

Satisfaction level of Comox respondents age 54 and under (above) and 55 and over (below)

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Enter your email address to subscribe to the Decafnation newsletter.
More

Who wields the real power: staff or elected officials?

Who do you think makes the important decisions that affect our communities? It’s natural to answer, “Our elected officials.” That’s who we hold accountable for our government’s performance. But all too often …

The story behind recent Comox union negotiations

In a press release published by the Comox Valley Record recently, Comox Mayor Paul Ives put a positive spin on the town’s new five-year collective agreement. But there’s much more to this story. It is good news, of course, that the town finally reached an agreement,...

Comox Valley Agriplex: white elephant or dream facility?

For more than three decades, some Comox Valley community organizations and elected officials have touted the need for a convention center. The Comox Valley lacks a facility that can accommodate the large numbers of people or trade show booths and equipment required by...