NEWS

Thursday, April 24, 2008

MAYOR SAM SULLIVAN

of the Corporation of the City of Vancouver,

Third Floor, City Hall 453 West 12th Avenue Vancouver, BC V5Y 1V4

May I please your Worship;

Re: WORK PERMIT TO INSTALL SEVEN (7) ROOF ANTENNAS, IN THE WESTEND AT 1395 BEACH AVENUE, CITY OF VANCOUVER, B.C.

I live in the Westend, at 1395 Beach Avenue, at Sunset Beach, near our beautiful Stanley Park. I have been living at the same address for 22 years.

1. On March 10th, 2008, the property owner posted a notice in the elevators and in the lobby that the “building will be undergoing a utility upgrade project” but gave no specifics in its notice as to what the work consisted of. Attached is the Memo from the Property Management Company.

2. A retired lawyer friend directed me to Vancouver City Hall. I found two separate permits were issued in February 2008 to Bonniehon Enterprises Ltd., the owner of the property, with its new mailing address located in Montreal, Québec at Le Complex Desjardins.

3. An electrical permit #516821 was issued to Mott Electric for 7 roof antennas, for cell phones and the second permit # DV427579 was issued on Feb. 21, 2008 for wireless internet and cell phones.

4. I learned later that with the project involving “Bell Mobility”, the electric power service is 200 kilowatts. It appears there is provision for a standby diesel generator for power when BC Hydro fails. Carbon monoxide monitors are a requirement on the permit, presumably for tenants to be forewarned of being overcome by diesel fumes, as the standby generator will be tightly nested by surrounding apartments.

5. Now, those permits issued by the City of Vancouver to Mott Electric, was issued without giving consideration and without giving notice to the tenants and to the residents of the Westend living near 1395 Beach Avenue.

6. I am very upset and so are the neighbours with condominiums who have not been notified of the project.

7. I am aware that the mandate for cell towers are regulated by the Minister of Industry, being a Federal government corporation, however the City of Vancouver did provide a work permit to Mott Electric to install seven (7) roofs antennas at 1395 Beach Avenue and as a result the City of Vancouver is complicit in that it did not even require the Applicant to give public notice to surrounding tenants and residents of the Westend.

8. Albeit Federal, Provincial and City elections are all less than 12 months away, Your Worship ought to know better than violate the right to notice and right to be heard which are principles enshrined in common law and in our Canadian Bill of Rights.

9. Myself and the neighbours in the Westend are also very concerned because the City of Vancouver, on one hand is claiming that cell towers are federally regulated yet on the other hand, the City of Vancouver, did provide an electrical permit to Mott Electric for 1395 Beach Avenue, to install the seven (7) roof antennas, and as such the City of Vancouver is responsible for the work being done at 1395 Beach Avenue.

10. Canada has no regulations in place to protect the environment which in this case includes humans of all ages including nursing mothers, from the effects of electro magnetic radiation, and this project will be equal or higher capacity that the maximum 150 kilowatts broadcast that FCC allows on remote mountain tops. (The permit, I am told by an electrical engineer, is for 200 amps 600 volts three phase which computes to 200 kilowatts). Surrounding apartments are as much as 10 floors higher. This means that the safety and security of the Westend is threatened.

11. What is disconcerting is Your Worship catering to the owner of the Surfside Apartments. For profit, the owner of the property, has put everyone at risk, knowing that the heavy equipment in the indoor garage of the property is hazardous, as the outside parking lot above, when it rains, leaks into the inside parking lot, where the heavy equipment is being installed.

12. Your Worship has issued a permit to a slum landlord and Your Worship has issued an electrical permit to Mott Electric who use unmarked vehicles to do their dirty work against the residents of the Westend.

13. In effect, the City of Vancouver is being completely reckless with the project at 1395 Beach Avenue.

14. The property owner, and others involved are keeping the project a secret from the tenants and the Westend community because they know that the Surfside Apartments is not suitable for installing seven (7) roof antennas given that the building envelope is in need of serious repair due to serious water leaks coming from the roof.

15. To refresh your memory, a couple of years ago, I had laid four (4) private informations before Judge Kitchen of the Vancouver Provincial court against four (4) different roofers working without a licence and without TQ’s, as was required in the municipality of the city of Vancouver.

The Judge had issued process on all four (4) defendants, however due to the city prosecutor’s unwillingness to prosecute the separate individuals, I found myself in a position of a private prosecutor. One accused pleaded guilty and paid a small fine and the other three accused, who had the money to hire lawyers, managed to get the AG to stay the charges during the day of the trial.

My concern then was the government unwillingness to regulate its laws and as a result, residents of this province are not protected against slum landlords who hire workers without qualifications.

Now, the City and the Government is exercising undemocratic practice one more time at the expense of the residents of this province by failing to notify the residents of the Westend community that a cell phone site is being installed on a roof of my building.

16. What I want is the principles of natural justice to be followed and not ignored. My neighbours and myself and my sister Gina Zanetti, would like to see the project stop forthwith by having Mott Electric’s electrical permit issued by the City of Vancouver revoked until the tenants and neighbours are given the right to notice and right to be heard.

17. On behalf of the tenants of the Surfside Apartments and on behalf of the near by neighbours, I am requesting from Your Worship to put a stop to the work order on the installation of seven (7) roof antennas being installed on the building where I have been living for over 20 years, on the basis that the tenants of the building and the immediate community were not notified about the project and we were not informed of any health hazards associated with electromagnetic radiation, which I understand at the present time, Environment Canada has no regulations in place to protect the environment from the effects of electro magnetic radiation

18. Last but not least, I reasonably expect that the tenants at the Surfside Apartments and residents of the Westend community, whom many are condominium owners, be notified immediately in writing of the project being stopped and that a public notice be published in the newspaper, for the purpose of a public a forum.

I ask that you please acknowledge receipt of this correspondence forthwith.

Thank you in advance for your attention in this serious matter.

Yours truly,

Tina Zanetti

c.c. Gregor Robertson

Sierra Club B.C.

Charlie Smith Editor of the Georgia Straight

Thereafter the letter to the Mayor, the "project" at 1395 Beach Avenue accelerated, thus leading any reasonable person to conclude that Sam Sullivan and members of council, are behind the microwave radiation that is being set up in the Westend, in secrecy.

There are serious concerns since the city especially is keeping everything a secret from the residents near 1395 Beach Avenue, regarding the microwave antennas.

The City Deputy Electrical Safety Manager & Supervisor of Field Operations Electrical Inspections Branch, John McMahon, for the City of Vancouver, in an email of April 29, 2008, advised Tina Zanetti that he won’t release any information regarding the project and if Ms. Zanetti and any other residents of the community want to have any particulars on the project including the power capacity of the antennas, they should make a request via the FOI.

Ms. Zanetti was further told that her “facts related to the increased power capacity of 200 kilowatts are not accurate and have no direct relationship to the radio wave power required for this project”.

However John McMahon is not prepared to tell Ms. Zanetti the power capacity which may even be higher than what her friend, who has has a PhD in electrical engineer, told her.

The City Deputy Electrical Safety Manager told Ms. Zanetti that there is no guarantee that she or anyone else would even get any information from the FOI, leading any reasonqble person to conclude that the project taking place is dangerous for the residents of the community.

Further, Mr. John McMahon is not prepared to give Ms. Zanetti the name of the electrical designer involved with the project which he claims is a professional engineer, thus leading her to believe that there are no qualified people involved in the project at 1395 Beach Avenue.

More on 1395 Beach Ave. and Paul H. Cody, the owner of the property

--------------------------------------------------------

Following is another story as to why Sam Sullivan, no longer should be Mayor of the City of Vancouver.

Vancouver Mayor Sam Sullivan, ought to follow the lead of Montreal, wherein a stiff by law will be put in place to keep the city looking clean.

Finally business owners, home owners and landords are put to task and will be responsible for looking after their community.

In Vancouver, being that the city is filthy and being that most business owners do not look after their store front and many landlords on the West and East Side of the city do not look after their property, they too ought to be fined for allowing their property to rot and to make the city look even more dirty.

In effect, a filthy city like Montreal and Vancouver shows the poor mentality of a society and shows also how the city government itself is corrupt, for Montreal used to be, once upon a time, the cleanest city in the country, until the city decided to no longer pay people to pick up trash and clean our parks and streets.

This new law, which takes effect in June of 2007, is caused by a few tourist visiting Montreal and complaining about the filth of the city.

We know that throughout the years, the City of Vancouver has also received tons of phone calls from visitors who complained not only about the amount of homeless on the street, but about the filth and corruption of the city.

Thus surely, Sam Sullivan, ought to stop curtailing to business, and landords and start making our city look clean and free of corruption by getting tough on those who do not care about their city.

-------------------------------------

Clean up - or else!

Fines stiff. Downtowners must keep their sidewalks looking spiffy

ALAN HUSTAK, MAX HARROLD of the Gazette contributed to this

The Gazette

Tuesday, February 20, 2007

Clean up the neighbourhood or be taken to the cleaners.

Tough new regulations making downtown property owners, merchants and residents responsible for keeping the streetscape clean as a whistle were unveiled yesterday by Ville Marie borough mayor Benoit Labonte.

Fines for failure to comply with the new rules, which take effect June 1, will be the stiffest in the country.

Penalties for first-time offenders range from $125 for plucking a city-grown flower to $250 for urinating in the street to $2,000 for painting graffiti. Failure to remove graffiti from private property could cost owners $1,000.

The penalties rise progressively for repeat offenders, reaching as high as $4,000 for companies that fail to comply.

Bar and restaurant owners who don't install ashtrays outside the main entrance of their establishments or post signs that identify that section of the street as a no-smoking zone are liable to fines as high as $1,000.

The distribution of handbills will be prohibited.

Perhaps the most contentious regulation is one that makes property owners and merchants responsible for the garbage, cigarette butts and waste paper in a 60-centimetre zone in the gutter beyond the sidewalks in front of their property.

"Yes, the fines are exorbitant, but we will tackle this problem once and for all," Labonte said yesterday.

"We intend to target major problems to clean up downtown, and the first will be to get rid of cigarette butts in the street.

"Smokers throw more than 3 million butts away each week. We're doing our part to keep the city clean - now we expect downtown merchants and the public to do their part. Keeping the city clean is the responsibility of everyone, not just the municipality."

To enforce the bylaws, 10 new inspectors will be added to the three already on staff. The tickets are almost identical to parking tickets, except the coloured stripe and type on the face is blue instead of red. Proceeds from the fines will go toward a new agency, the Ville Marie Beautification Fund, the details of which will be announced next week.

At a well-attended meeting at the borough hall on de Maisonneuve Blvd. near St. Hubert St. last night, some residents took exception to being forced to clean part of the street in front of their property.

"The city is shirking its responsibility to clean," said Bernard Foucher, who owns a condo on Ste. Elisabeth St.

"What happens when I go away for a week during the festivals? Now it's my job to clean up after someone who litters in front of my house? That's not fair.

"I participate in the cleanup of my street because I'm proud of it," said Foucher, who is in his 50s and who has lived for 17 years on the small street. "But don't threaten me and don't force me."

Another condo owner said she does not want to be held accountable for the city's already sloppy trash-collection service.

"I leave garbage out for a week or a week and a half sometimes before it's picked up," said the woman, who spoke on condition that her name not be used. "I have more important things to do than run after the borough on this. That's why I live in a condo."

Many at the meeting voiced cautious support for the new rules, but worried the borough might not enforce them evenly.

"What about the huge apartment buildings near Atwater and de Maisonneuve?" resident Robert Hajaly asked.

"Will you force them to plant some grass? All they have now is dirt (in front of the buildings) that turns into mud when it rains. That brings the value of everything down."

Borough councillor Karim Boulos said the landscaping of large properties would be left up to the "good taste and responsible ownership" of landlords.

"We'll start with getting the graffiti cleaned up," Boulos said.

But earlier yesterday, Vision Montreal opposition councillor Pierre Mainville said the proposed bylaw cannot be enforced.

"No one is against cleaning up downtown, but how can 13 inspectors patrol all the streets?" Mainville asked. "Mayor Labonte expects people to do the work normally assigned to blue-collar workers.

"People will be ticketed arbitrarily and unfairly."

Similarly, while he supports the general objective of a downtown cleanup, Andre Poulin, head of Destination centre-ville - which represents 8,500 downtown merchants - wants to take a closer look at the regulations.

"We'll have to analyze the fine print and see if the bylaws are practical, if they can be applied," Poulin said. "For example, it may be hard to enforce keeping the gutters clean when the space is often occupied by automobiles."

Peter Sergakis, who owns a number of downtown bars and is a vocal opponent of the anti-smoking bylaw, said the compulsory aspect of the bylaws concerns him. "I am really proud of my city. I am ready to co-operate and do my best to keep it clean, but to make me responsible for what other people throw on the sidewalk and in the gutters, I hope they don't enforce a law like that," Sergakis said.

Isabelle Hudon, president of the Montreal Board of Trade, said that while it's obvious the rules respond to a need, "the legislation shouldn't serve as a pretext for the borough to shuck its responsibilities for keeping the city clean to the general public."

ahustak@thegazette.canwest.com

On the Web: view the draft bylaw at www.ville.montreal.qc.ca/villemarie

© The Gazette (Montreal) 2007

------------------------------------------------

December 8, 2006

Hello to the Editor of the Georgia Straight:

re: Sullivan bullish on disorder by Charlie Smith

Mayor Sam Sullivan Bullish on disorder

After reading Charlie’s article this week, he should have entitled it “Sullivan without a heart”

Sullivan’s recommendation of 10 “immediate actions, which includes possibly hiring more prosecutors for the city is not in the least to make this city safer from crime, since the city prosecutor’ Helen Gerber and her staff only prosecute the poor and the working class and refuses to prosecute those for example in the construction industry who many violate the city by law by working without a business licence and/or proper licence.

It is a known fact that the city of Vancouver curtails to developers, contractors, and slum landlords. In effect, my experience as a private prosecutor for four different roofing companies working in the city of Vancouver without a licence or proper licence, has clearly shown me that both the city prosecutor and the Crown’s office rather ticket panhandlers and jail walkers than ticketing the real criminals of this city who has the funds to pay for violations of the by law, which in turn could pay for affordable housing.

Subsequently, on behalf of the residents of the city of Vancouver, I challenge Sam Sullivan and the office of the Attorney General of B.C. to step up to the plate and be men instead of being a bunch of cowards. Christmas is upon us, and residents of this city expect our city and government officials to stop hammering on the poor and vulnerable and rather come up with a viable solution for those less fortunate than them.

Tina Zanetti

-------------------------------------------------------

A huge amount of homeless people are taking refuge in the city of Vancouver, ranging from the age of 12 to over 70 years of age. Many of the homeless are women.

We often hear our elected officials comparing the city of Vancouver to some big cities in the United States, but the municipality of Vancouver is different from our neighbour to the South. More importantly, the amount of homeless people living on the Street of Vancouver is ten times more when one considers the population of the city to others.

The filth in the city has always been visible to tourists and visitors, but at present not only is the filth visible, the city with its million dollar sky scrapers and apartment buildings is showing the greed of our City and Provincial Officials.

Justice4you's frequent visitor to the site has written the following on the recent serial slasher, who thus far has stabbed four homeless people at different times, on subsequent days in the city of Vancouver:

So far four homeless people have been cruelly attacked by Vancouver's serial slasher. This is of course a heinous crime. But the streets of Vancouver have long carried harshly punitive consequences for the poorest of the poor.

A couple of years ago gangs were riding through ghetto alleys on bicycles, beating and robbing the poor. Convicted serial killer Jordan and charged serial killer Pickton frequented these streets to find their victims.

Homeless people on the streets are differentially victimized by such extreme punishment as no other class in society suffers as much from street-crime so the homeless are not accorded Charter equality rights.

How would you describe the punitive consequences of homelessness? Try out the following descriptors and see which fit: extreme, cruel, unusual, destructive, noxious, hazardous, health-destroying, life-destroying. What does the Criminal Code of Canada say about administering something which is destructive and noxious?

Those who suffer from physical and mental disabilities suffer even more than other homeless people. How does one reconcile this with Charter "fundamental justice"?

Is it fundamental justice to evict people with physical and mental disabilities into the street from shelters of last resort, knowing (as anyone with common sense knows) that the punitive consequences may constitute effectively, corporal and capital punishment? Corporal and capital punishment without so much as a jay-walking violation is administered daily by Mayor Sullivan and Council.

There is no fair and public hearing or other due process of law as guaranteed by the Charter. The municipal and other levels of government do not honour any Charter S.36 commitment to provide the services essential for health and safety and life to this class of people.

Homeless people are then a new PARIAH CLASS in Canada, bereft of the constitutional protections enjoyed by other citizens.

Nobody has a right to sleep on the street. Nobody is required to sleep on the street.

---------------------------------------------------

As Kim Kerr from DERA just said through BCTV news, "they're homeless; they're dying". People don't "live" on the street. They die on the street. It is not a normal, natural way to live.

It is, prima facie, "unusual" and it is effectively a form of punishment. It is certainly cruel and becoming more so as BCTV points out that a gruesome "quasi snuff film" industry has developed with a market for videos showing abuse of the homeless.

Opportunities in that deathly industry grow daily as BCTV also tells us GVRD now has > 2,174 homeless vs. 1,121 in 2002.

Advocacy organizations for the physically and mentally disabled remain silent as the wonderful "right" of property managers to evict even the sick and handicapped from shelters of last resort becomes more and more entrenched.

DERA for the poor

Following is a book for anyone who need to get back on track and realize that Loving God is Loving Others and maybe a copy of such book should be given to the Mayor of the city of Vancouver, as inspiration and love is what is needed.

under the overpass

Welcome to the City of Vancouver.