I don’t see how this kind of behaviour promotes or supports the kind of community all candidates have said they want for White Rock — one that is friendly and proud. This kind of deceptive campaigning only promotes fear and supports anger. How do you think that effects relationships within the community?

Please note that one “fact” presented by Coleridge is correct only by ignoring other related and important facts. He states that Bosa was permitted “2 additional floors with no additional amenities provided to the City.” The rest of the story is that the additional two floors resulted in a higher purchase price for the City property and higher DCC fees collected. The only reason a larger amenity contribution under the Density Bonus Policy was not received is because the value of what they had already included in their project still far exceeded the amount required — they gave more than they had to, even with the additional two floors.

Three weeks ago, an email full of lies about a number of candidates was sent to a lot of people by “Alison and Tom Baker”.

It seemed suspicious. The language used sounded just like James Coleridge and the text contained mangled interpretations of facts – facts that would be hard for most people to compile just because it would take sifting through lots and lots of tedious reports… unless provided by a councillor.

I don’t know very much about computers, but I know enough to ask the right questions. I searched on the Internet to find out how to track down where an email message came from. I followed the instructions and it appeared as though the message from “Alison and Tom Baker” actually came from James Coleridge’s computer.

Since I don’t really understand how it all works, I found a couple specialists on Internet security and electronic forensics. They analysed dozens of messages and affirmed my suspicions. I asked them to answer a list of questions about how likely it is that the messages came from anywhere else other than Coleridge’s computer. Without exception, their report uses phrases like “highly unlikely”.

They were careful to note that “nothing is impossible”. For example, it is within the realm of possibility that someone walking down the street tomorrow will get struck by lightening. It’s highly unlikely — almost impossible, but still within the realm of possibility.

Experts in computer forensics have concluded that it appears Coleridge faked the emails that spread lies about other candidates.

It should be no wonder that Mayoral Candidate Ferguson and Councillor Coleridge aren’t aware of some key information. Were they there when it was presented and discussed? Looking at their attendance record, it’s clear, chances are they weren’t.

Some candidates have anchored their campaigns on statements about “common sense” and how hard they work. I’ve written several times about why I think “common sense” is an intellectual cop out. But let’s look at this claim of hard work by Ferguson.

Ferguson’s email signature says “working hard for our community”. Her ads have people testifying to her hard work. I found this very curious because I’ve worked with Ferguson for 3 years and rarely have I seen evidence of what I would call “hard work”.

Her campaign material sounds impressive. There’s a long list of very worthy organizations for which she’s sat on the board of directors or volunteered. She attended an endless list of ribbon-cuttings and tea parties.

What’s interesting is that, when you ask other people at the same organizations how Ferguson contributed, they talk about how she attended … sometimes. But when she did show up at all, she often arrived late and left early. And she rarely took on any real responsibility.

This exact same pattern is apparent in her record as a City Councillor. She missed a significant number of meetings, and for the ones she did attend, it was not at all unusual for her to leave early.

Her committees were undeniably unproductive. Her list of accomplishments is sparse. And those tasks were completed with very expensive consultants and intensive staff time.

By contrast, my committees and I produced five policy papers without a penny spent on consultants, and none required a huge investment of staff time. Compare that to the $70,000 spent on the ill-fated branding project and the expensive, bungled Economic Strategy.

Given that she has actually accomplished so little as a Councillor, yet says she said she was working so hard, the question is, what’s to make anyone think she’d do better as Mayor?

The Purchase and Sale Agreement describes the payments required by Bosa Properties. The City used a second mortgage as an added layer of protection for taxpayers.

This was certainly no secret. In fact, Jean Kromm, a director for both the White Rock Ratepayers Association and Citizens for Positive Renewal, had this to say in her 2005 Annual Report to the WRRA:

A copy of the contract signed by the city with Bosa Properties Inc. was obtained through Freedom of Information and considerable concern was expressed regarding the inclusion of a Second Mortgage to be held by the city at no interest rate until the first phase of the development is completed.

All related documents, except negotiation details (expected to be released this coming week), have been freely available for years on the City website.

I find it very peculiar that, in the middle of a campaign, we would release one document because one candidate has asked for it. He should have asked for it to be made public sometime in the past four years, not during an election.

So, help me figure this out:

• Coleridge is concerned that people have been asking for this information;
• Coleridge says Council should have released the document sooner;
• Coleridge has been on Council for the last 3 years;
• … why hasn’t Coleridge requested that the document be released?

Why is Coleridge criticizing Peddemors for not making the request sooner, when he’s had 3 years to do it himself, but didn’t?

He says he doesn’t support staff digging out records of the Town Centre land sale negotiations to make them public during an election. Is it because people knowing the truth will undermine his campaign? Will it weaken his criticisms when people see that the City made a lot more money by opting for a payment plan? Is it that citizens might agree that a payment plan was a good idea since the deal netted the City more than our top-shelf appraiser said should be expected?

You wouldn’t know this because you don’t attend our closed-door sessions, however, Coleridge lied at the all-candidate’s meeting last night. He said he “broke with Council… I disagreed with them” on the branding. In fact, he stated he supported the exercise and the “Island of White Rock” brand on multiple occasions. Other members of Council expressed reservation. Coleridge was not one of them.

It’s really ironic that the councillor who talks the most about closed-door meetings is the one who most benefits from them being closed. The opinions Coleridge shares behind closed-doors would be shocking to most citizens — not because of what he says, but how different it is from what he says in public. It’s too bad you couldn’t hear what he had to say about tax increases — he said they were too low!

Another Coleridge behaviour pattern is for him to make a big production out of accusing other candidates of doing what he himself is doing. It’s as if he’s sensing his own weaknesses and trying to project them onto others to distract or deflect from himself. ie: being on a slate, campaign spending, closed-door meetings, making decisions based on political strategy rather than facts, playing both sides of an issue, overwhelming staff with information-request fishing expeditions, etc etc.

Also from last night — hypocrisy check — Ferguson saying she didn’t support the Spirit Square and I think she also said something about closed-door meetings. Who started the Spirit Square project? Which councillor was advocating for it until council assigned the project to me to try making up for a year of lost time? How many times did she vote in favour of the project? And if she didn’t support it, why didn’t she use those opportunities to seek changes or set conditions for her continued support? And which councillor was responsible for the ill-fated branding exercise? Were those open meetings?

Again on Coleridge, how did he engage the public in developing the Environmental Strategic Plan? At what point did he decide to have public consultation beyond just the Environment Committee? Exactly what was it that precipitated that change in his plans? I’ll give you a hint: he wasn’t very receptive to my suggestions that public consultation should involve more than just the Environment Committee.

I hope the spotlight of this campaign makes Coleridge’s behaviour visible to citizens. I hope they get to see how different he speaks when he’s not in front of an audience.

—–Original Message—–
From: Peggy Clark
Sent: Wed 10/29/2008 9:24 AM
To: James Coleridge
Cc: Mayor and Council
Subject: RE: Comments

Councillor Peddemors has asked the Mayor if she is willing schedule an In-Camera meeting for Council to discuss this whether some information on Bosa can come out of in-camera. The Mayor indicated to me she would like this in-camera meeting scheduled and I am arranging this with Tracey.
Councillor Peddemors did not ask staff to release this information.

Peggy Clark
City Manager
City of White Rock
604-541-2133

________________________________

From: James [mailto:jcoleridge@city.whiterock.bc.ca]
Sent: October 29, 2008 9:01 AM
To: Peggy Clark
Cc: Catherine Ferguson; Doug McLean (CR)
Subject: COmments
Importance: High

Peggy,

I understand that Stewart is asking staff to release in-camera information on the Bosa deal. This is highly unusual and should be an Council decision not one councillor who is under pressure during an election. I think this highly politicize staff. I do not support staff spending time on this.

James

James Coleridge
Councillor
City of White Rock
778-998-8010

“Living, working and playing in Canada’s #1 City”

Personally, I don’t think so. However, sitting in a councillor’s chair should not be a life-long occupation.

We have candidates who are already in their 3rd decade of sitting on council and halfway through their 2nd decade. Ironically, they are the ones on the slate with “renewal” in its name and calling for change on council.

I agree that room should be made for new voices and perspectives on city council. The question is, who should be removed in order to create that space? Logic would suggest, those who’ve been there longest should be considered for the trapdoor-in-the-floor first.

Whose time is up? It’s up to voters to decide.

If you think term limits might be a good idea, don’t vote for the candidate who’s already been in a council chair for over 20 years: Coleridge.

The truth is, the deal between the City and BOSA Properties has been public information and posted on the City’s website for years. It’s no secret that the City used a second mortgage contract as the legal tool to secure the final payment for the land purchase.

This was the subject of debate during the last election. Either Coleridge has forgotten or he’s hoping you have.

It really is a pointless argument anyway because the City will receive its money in a couple months, right on time.