Lumby's mayor says there will be no censoring of questions by the village, for next week's public meeting with BC Corrections. Kevin Acton says people will be able to ask whatever question they want at the session at Charles Bloom school next Wednesday night at 7PM. "Nobody will be censoring the questions. We want the tough questions asked in front of the public and answered by the province. I want those things asked and answered as well." Acton says people can submit questions ahead of time at the village office if they want, but people will also be able to ask questions on the spot. "All we ask is they sign up on a sheet (in the school) so we can keep some order to it. We don't just want to have open mikes like last time because it was a bit of a mess when it got played out. There were lots of inappropriate things said." Former mayor Joanne Kineshanko feels council was pressured into allowing all questions, and she still has concerns. "I'm concerned about the whole process since this started over a year ago. It hasn't been open and it hasn't been transparent, and that's what has upset people." Kineshanko, who was the village's mayor for 10 years, feels council is only looking at a prison's benefits like grants in lieu of taxes, and not the social costs it could bring. She says the process has been flawed, and council which she feels has a pro-prison agenda, has handled it poorly.
2 comments:
When we lived in a rural community several years ago there was a proposal to put a group home for troubled youth close to our elementary school. The principal who did not live in the community cautioned parents about such a facility being established in a rural setting so close to a school.
He said that by the time the youth are in the system they have substantial emotional/personality issues and it would be difficult to monitor them in a rural setting.
The community was a safe community, children walked to school, rode their bikes, played in nature and parks unaccompanied by adults.
Now extrapolate those concerns to ones posed by situating a "Correction Facility" in the heart of a community.
These facilities are really collection and holding units where fellons get schooled in Crime 101.
There is no doubt that birds of a feather flock together and unsavoury characters will visit the facility and frequent the vicinity of Lumby and beyond.
Will every parent have to accompany their child as they ride their bike, go to school or explore the natural surroundings of Lumby?
If a facility goes ahead it would be prudent for seniors and single women to install security systems and have bars installed on vulnerable windows.
If the prison goes ahead I would worry if my son or daughter were a member of the RCMP I would hope that they would be not be alone when on patrol in the Lumby area and beyond.
The thought of a solitary officer approaching pulled over vehicles on some dark lonely road is chilling enough without the addition of unsavoury or questionable strangers in our midst.
The benefit of a prison will be to those who own the dozens of homes that are currently not selling. Once a sale has been made to a prison employee the owners are free to move on to more desirable communities.
Highway 6 is already heavily travelled and my usual journey is made tense by those who like to ride the bumper of those doing the speed limit. Now add in all the vans transporting prisoners back and forth to court in Kelowna.
We already have enough vehicles emmiting carbon and throwing up dust in this narrow valley.
The best place for a prison is in Kelowna, the carbon foot-print will be greatly reduced. Build a green park-like buffer of trees around a facility in Kelowna.
There are more police and eyes on the street. There are more health care facilites, including mental health care (which I have learned is very difficult to access in Vernon). There are more hospital beds and better access to public transportation.
Vernon already service Methadone clients from throughout the valley.
Each community should service their own citizens with issues, be they crimminal behaviour, drug addiction etc.
Making Lumby a prison ghetto is one bad idea.
There is an advert in the March 18th Lumby paper that didn't say people could just come to the meeting with their own questions - not quite what the Mayor says in your article is it?
About trouble at the open mic at the first meeting - whose fault was that? The Mayor was trying to stop the people from Area D from having any say in the matter and getting angry when people voiced opposition and questioned the sales job.
The Mayor told people they couldn't raise their hand unless they lived in Lumby - now is that the kind of Mayor that wants everyone to ask the tough questions?
It's not the people opposed to a prison who call other people hysterical and yell at them in public or say inappropriate things - the Mayor and Council are working to keep the opposition from being heard - any way they can - by innuendo and by framing things in a way that misrepresents what's going on.
When Area D Director approached the Mayor and Council - (the same day the Administrator quit - January 17) and made a presentation - because Area D wanted a voice on the matter - Council didn't even put it in their minutes - look for yourself www.lumby.ca Then the Mayor went on the radio on February 7th and said that he had the support of the residents in Area D? What's that about??? Was the Mayor listening?
Where is the record of 300 people outside at the rally opposing a prison on February 7th? Any mention of them on record in the Minutes? I can't find it. Or the 5 letters of opposition that were hand delivered by Mr.Fisher and the petition with 176 signatures - is that in the Minutes? I don't think so.
The Mayor was asked to come out and talk to the people at the rally - did he do that? NO!!
It's Lumby's Mayor and Council who say and do inappropriate things. It's not about a prison anymore - it's about a biased Council with some kind of agenda to try out a US prison system in Canada - in Lumby - the biggest prison yet to be built in BC in a town with one four way stop light.
Lumby has been growing - with a better future now that it's not a company town - but Lumby Council is backing out of everything - from the Film Commission to the road to Silver Star and where's the Community Forest proposal gone???
By making it hard for people in the Industrial zone to subdivide with restrictive bylaws - Lumby Council is preventing healthy development.
Lumby's Mayor and a few people with dollar signs in their eyes are trying to buy referendum votes with job offers.
The Mayor and Council had no mandate to even start this whole process - it's not in the OCP. No mandate to say Lumby was interested - no mandate to hold a referendum - People said no - but Mayor and Council just carry regardless.
Post a Comment