“INSIGHTS

Friday, Nov. 27, 1992 - North Shore News - 7

ighting city hall and the bylaw blues

THEY SAY you can’t fight
city kali. Clearly someone
Tasyot to Cel Joka Ingram.

When he feels the city is in the
wicag —- when it enacts bylaws,
for instance, under circumstances
for which it bas no Iegal provision
in the Munscipal Act — he
believes it is not only his right to
faghe, but his duty.

1 don’t know about you, but I
don't give the day-to-day gov-
eming of oor town a great deal of
t

Not that 3 don’t care, you un-
derstand. It’s jest that the name
of Mayor Loucks *tim-
mediately feap to my mind when 1
get ap in the morning.

When I get, say, a parking tick-
et for averstaying my welcome
beaceth 3 tizee-restricted reguia-
tion sign, I tend to pay it humbly,
aad, with a fiso whimper, prom-
ise never to do it again as long as
I five, world without end, amen.

That's bocause I assume {’ve
broken some law or other.

Laws zaake me nervous. They
are, after afl, tegal thingees, and
when you tirak legal thingees
they can torow you into some-
thing cise at makes me nervous.
Jail.

Mind you, as far as I know,
they don’t send you up the river
for overpexrking. Parking scgula-
tions are covered under bylaws, a
pint-sized legal term, which,
roughly trassiated from Greek,
means, ‘“Pizase pay cash. We
don't take Visz.'

If you ever get 2 ticket that you
want to dispwiv, you should ask to
see the byfaw covering that par-
ticular infraction.

I did once, and was soon up to

I cestainly didn’t question the
Byire. I never asked how that

Paul
Hughes

HUGHES’ VIEWS
making, not only my ticket, but
the bylaw itself questionabie.

John ingram, however, did ask
those questions.

The answers he got, or cather
the tap-dance around those an-
swers, may well surprise you.
Especially if, at this raoment, you
have a ticket Mapping under your
windshicld wiper.

John is a former notary public
who, unlike me, is quite capable
of distinguishing his whereas from
a hole in the ground.

His dispute over the bylaws re-
garding regulations goes a long
way back. All the way back to
1978, in fact, when the city, at the
request of the Greater Vancouver
Regional District (GVRD), install-
ed signs restricting street parking
in the vicinity of Lions Gate Hos-
pital.

There were two reasons for this.

First, the new regulations would
remove the burden of street park-
ing by hospital staff and visitors
from the local residents.

Second, the regional district
needed those restrictions because
it needed some way of forcing
people to use the pay-parking
structure it had to build anyway
to comply with municipal stipula-
tions.

It seems to me that making the

‘MAILBOX
Collins missed point
of deportation case

Dear Editor:

i read with amusemcat Doug
Coliins’ latest diatribe “‘Somcthing
to remember”’ on Nov. II.

Never did I expect to witness
the day when Collins would speak
out against the immigration
department fer ejecting someone

from the country who entered il-
legally.

It seems he feels certain allow-
ances can be made for such arriv-
als who de se in order to speak
owt against identifiable racial or

religious groups.

Collins’ effort to rationalize his
position by listing individuals
legally allowed to enter the coun-
try who don’t meet his approval
criteria not only misses the point
of the Irving case, but exposes all
too well his racial-based paranoia.

Certainly on Remembrancc Day
we must recognize the premise
that sowed Nazi Germany: intol-
erance.

Craig Ruemke
North Vancouver

Community does not
deserve blind hatred

Dear Editor:

How hard does a community
have to beg to have Doug Col-
fins retired from the pages of
the newspaper that represents
us?

His ugly and hurtful manner
of expressing his opinions is a
source of shame to those of us
who five on the North Shore.

As the self-proclaimed

“Voice of North and West
Vancouver,"’ the North Shore
News demeans us by continu-
ing to give Doug Collins’ drivel
such a wide forum.

We deserve intelligent and
thoughtful writing; blind
hatred does not qualify.

Sandra Bailey
North Vancouver

44 As far as I know they don't send

you up the river for overparking. 99

parking lot free would have solvea
the problem more simply. The
first problean anywa:

As to the second. why should it
be aur problem how the regional
district funds iis construction pro-
jects?

So what, you say? This is all
ancient history, and who cares.
about parking bylaws anyway?

John Ingrara cares.

His concern stems not so much
from the parking regulations
themselves, but from the manner
in which they were created.

The change to the regulations
was done by resolution.

Resolutions are passed behind
closed doors in committee.

According to the Municipal
Act, public business must be done
in public, except in cases where
the public interest will be jeopas-
dized.

To be fair to the city, a notice
to the local residents affected by
the change was sent around ad-
dressed to the occupant. If 50%
objected — which they had to do
by return mail — the council
would not proceed with the plan.

Perhaps you read occupant
mail, pizza shop ads, and every
other piece of junk that gets flung
into your mailbox. | don’t think
anybody else docs.

Still, 20% of the local occu-
nants took the time to buy an
envelope, stamp it and send a let-
ter to the city saying no thanks —
a resounding majority in this
bogus referendum, | would think,
but not enough to convince the ci-
ty.

So the signs went up.

John has been fighting ever
since. It may seem like a trivial
matter, but the fact is, laws, or

even bylaws, that have been pass-
ed without the benefit of proper
legal process have no business on
the books. There is a principle in-
volved here.

Other more recent regulations
have come our way of similarly
doubtful effectiveness.

The resident-exempt parking
changes, for instance, wherein
awners of vehicles must pay an
annual registration fee for the
right to park their cars in front of
their own homes.

The city is also seeking more
power to issue tickets enforcing
selected bylaws.

A new bylaw, granting the city
power to issue on-the-spot fines,
will, if approved by Chief Judge
Will Diebolt, effectively remove
the right of a court hearing by the
offender first.

John is fighting these changes,
not because he thinks the various
regulations are unnecessary, but
because if a municipal council is
allowed to establish bylaws
without due legal process, then a
dangerous precedent is set.

We don’t pay enough attention
to the actions of our municipal
powers that de. Perhaps we all
subconsciously believe that you
can’t fight city hall.

Thank God John Ingram
doesn’t.

Historic constitutional campaign
taught all of us important lessons

Dear Editor:

I am writing with zegard to Mr.
John Jaye’s letter to the editor
(“Yes yote ignored constituents’
concerns,’” Wednesday, Nov. 18).

The national referendum on the
Constitution was an extraordinary
experience for Canadians in
that it was only the second time in
this century that our country’s cit-
izens have been given a direct say
in how they are governed.

Mr. Jaye is correct when he
states that I voiced my own per-
sonal opinion on the referendum.
That is precisely why referendums
are held, so that each person can
express a personal opinion.

Mr. Jaye's notion that | ignored
the wishes of my constituents in
West Vancouver-Garibaldi is er-
ronecus. Many neighborhoods in
West Vancouver, including
Cauifeild, Lighthouse Park and
north of the Upper Levels High-
way, voted Yes.

Based on results released by the
District Returning Office, the
average Yes vote in 30 federal
polling areas in the West Van-
couver portion of my riding was
approximately 48%.

fn addition, other communities
in West Vancouver-Garibaldi also
voted Yes; for instance, residents
of Whistler voted 52% in favor of
the referendum.

In the last provincia! election
the Liberal party campaigned on a
promise to allow more free votes,
and to reform the idea of strict
party discipline. During the refer-
endum campaign Gordon Wilson
backed up that promise by reaf-
firming the Liberal caucus posi-
tion to allow members to support
either side.

Mr. Wilson recognized the right
of ail individuals, including
members of the Libcral caucus, to
express their own opinions.

When the public is divided on a

major issue of provincial or na-
tional importance, it is the re-,
sponsibility of elected repre-
sentatives to express their own
views.

Now that the constitutional ref-
erendum is behind us, and the
public has spoken, I will respect
the majority wishes of my con-
stituents.

All of us have learned impor-
tant lessons from this historic
campaign. For myself, the re-
emphasis on the need to break
down strict party discipline has
been strongly reaffirmed.

It is interesting to note that
among the letters to the editor in
the Wednesday, Nov. 18 edition
of the North Shore News is a let-
ter praising MP Chuck Cook for
standing up for his principles by
breaking with his party ranks and
voting No.

David Mitchell, MLA
West Vancouver-Garibaldi