September 12, VIA District of Oak Bay Oak Bay Municipal Hall 2167 Oak Bay Avenue Victoria, BC, V8R 1G2

Transcription

1 September 12, 2016 VIA District of Oak Bay Oak Bay Municipal Hall 2167 Oak Bay Avenue Victoria, BC, V8R 1G2 ATTENTION: Council of the District of Oak Bay Dear Sir/Madam: RE: GNS Junior School Redevelopment Devon Properties Ltd. ( Devon ) acting as the owner s representatives of Marine Oak apartments (1725 Beach Drive) would like to offer support of the proposed Glenlyon Norfolk ( GNS ) Junior School redevelopment. Marine Oaks is the immediate neighbor to the school and Devon has reviewed the proposed development with the building owners and GNS. Devon and the owners believe it will be an excellent addition to the block and are very comfortable with the development. GNS has been a good neighbor for a longtime and provided comfort to our concerns with this process. GNS will work with us through the construction process to make sure our property is not impacted by the work. Regards, DEVON PROPERTIES LTD. Dave Craig President DC/cm

2 Maura Jones From: Oak Bay Council Subject: RE: I Support bylaw Original Message----- From: Warren Robertson [mailto: Sent: October :33 AM To: Roy Thomassen <rthomassen@oakbay.ca> Cc: Oak Bay Council <obcouncil@oakbay.ca> Subject: I Support bylaw 4669 Building and Planning Dept Oak Bay Municipal Hall 2167 Oak Bay Ave As a resident of Oak Bay for over 20 years I support Bylaw 4669 to discharge the land use contract. A great project it will be. Thank you, Regards, Warren Robertson 2386 Central Ave Victoria, BC V8S 2S4 1

3 Maura Jones Subject: RE: bylaw no 4669 and the meaning of inclusiveness and equality in our communities to the equal local electors From: K Maloney [mailto: Sent: October :23 AM Subject: bylaw no 4669 and the meaning of inclusiveness and equality in our communities to the equal local electors Members of the Council: Under British Columbia legislation we have a duty to uphold a public interests Regional Statute: School ACT. That k-12 school regulatory provincial law states that schools are to be free and children have equally access to them, without any discrimination against their healthcare disability. Human Rights Lawyers argued that our School ACT is Positive Law which requires schools on our bylaw community lands to be free. Bylaw No 4669 wants us to subordinate our duty to serve children, by permitting our school lands to be sites of trade, where children are products exchanged with user fees to pay for what is to be free. If B.C. responsible governance is Rule of Law is only a choice, which Societies are claiming, not delegated to a Regional powers for serving children as assumed by our Supreme Courts, council can vote yes, but if they agree that Regional Boards hold those duties to our Oak Bay children, and school lands are not to charge access fees for what is to be free, under Positive Law they will strike down any bylaw that contradicts our local elector duties to uphold our delegated Regional powers to provide only free schools.. Society Boards, like GlenLyon Norfolk, who claim to be voluntarily and altruistically charitable ITA Boards, cannot discriminate against the local electors' children access to free schools. The Minister of Finance's Society ACT does not permit these Directors to get any special tax governing powers, to operate the capital and operating charitable collections for their own private members' Societal services.. Contrary to that rhetorical rationalized claim of members of all these B.C. Society ACT Boards, they cannot usurp any ITA self-governing powers held by our elected, autonomous, financially accountable responsible Regional Boards. Their Mistake of the Law, as one rule in democracy does apply equally to all, amounts to a considerable amount of money, going to the private under our public interests duties to all children of all local electors. Their choice to register as though private charity ITA is permitted, and that the era will administrate an enforcement of our children's duty to beg, in order for them to subsidize the taxes of their donors, users, and private members only Society, is abuse of Rule of Law. Regardless of their provincial economic ITA charitable collection claims that using a an elected trustee, who is running a private on line charitable foundation, to funnel private user fees claims, as though donations, in order to gain public revenue entitlements for their own private use, to charge our children access on our school lands for what under Rule of Law is free, is an abuse of democratic Rule of Law to uphold responsibilities delegated to elected Regional Board to be delivered under a provincial Statute that requires all our children to access free schools. Without a knowledgeable informed local electorate, Society members can do a great deal of damage to democracy Rule of Law. They will attempt to tell you Rule of Law is a choice for you as a local elector to obey or not. Currently their attitude that their own Society members are first class citizens with ITA self-governed entitlements, and we the public, are merely second class ITA citizens without recourse to be forced to fund their capital and operating costs, for their Society members schools Choices to pay taxes under our ITA to support these Directors, and members of a variety of Society ACT Boards, tell us that schools are merely sites of commercialized sold healthcare, sports, and education under our Ministers licensed Society ACT facility spaces. ITA charitable spaces priced in an international market exchange, as though local children are entitled to nothing for free. That they claim is why our Minister of Finance's Society ACT Boards are permitted to operate our ITA collections for their own private charitable members services! Regardless if the child is local or foreign, pay fees or not, our Finance Minister and Mayors with Bill 29 and bylaws that violate our legal regional responsibilities to treat all children equally, lead us to believe responsible governance is a choice, and we can decide that children are not to be treated equally, and some but not all, can be passed off as charitable beneficiaries of public ITA finance by our 1

4 Superintendents registering them under our Minister of Education. If they are right, and our Regional STATUTE is wrong, then both school and income taxes too are private choices, so why does responsible government School ACT and ITA Rule of Law say we have to pay them. We would be fools to pay any taxes, when we have no private Society to tax plan for our equal sec. 15 access entitlements. Charitable accumulative ITA k-12 Society Boards ITA accounting caused primary school closures in Oak Bay. Now, our 4 year olds are bused out of Oak Bay. Apparently, we cannot afford to offer equal health, education and sports Ministers facility spaces for free to our Oak Bay REGIONAL electors. That is a direct result of the fact that we provincially are spending too much of our equalization federal finances directly on Societies personal private services for their members only. Society Boards claim that we, the local electors as a public, can be forced to subsidize the private taxes of their donors, users, and private members charitable private healthcare, education, recreation, and social services entitlements, taken from us without any regard to the fact that Rule of Public interests Law does not permit this use of any ITA collected public revenue, distributed as though we have no public entitled to access their sec. 15 equal rights services, for themselves and for their children. That is the Mistake of the law committed by Directors of B.C. Society ACT members. If they continue to claim that Oak Bay children are not entitled to be provided equal access for their special needs professionals services, their k-12 professional teachers classrooms, or their volunteer professional teacher coaches in sports and the arts, we have not upheld the democracy duties which we purport to do under our public healthcare insurance and Regional elected delegated accountable governance. Bylaws are doing administratively for the provincial Minister of Finance, what they cannot do constitutionally to their own local electors. Our Mayor and Council favour schools with fees for healthcare, recreation, education, and social housing offered under the unaccountable self-government Societies who rule us is our own communities, pitting us against each other is we question their right to exist and discriminate against our children's constitutional rights. That means, Oak Bay families will pay for their children to walk and attend the schools on their block or accept driving or busing primary school Oak Bay children to Esquimalt is they want to learn French, or Victoria, is they want to learn French under responsible accountable governance, or another free school or another charity that gifts them a better return on their taxes under religious Church and State ITA facilitation of education. When we pay for what by Rule of Law is free, we accept a parent's queue jumping under the Minister of Finance governance of his Society ACT Boards privately license by the Minister of Health, as though K-12 education is also healthcare, how did that happen? Our Mayor and council must declare their conflict of interest. They cannot in good faith, continue to collect and transfer to the province, School ACT taxes under a Rule of Law, that they claim is a choice, equal to Society ACT Bill 29 private purposes. When responsible governance oversees the collections of money for our enumerated primary mandatory school age children to our Regional responsible Board, accountability to these local electors, will be under responsible Regional control, where we might be able to get enough money to offer Oak Bay children the primary schools that they are constitutionally entitled to have. We must support the character of maintaining our community or we are the snobs that other community local electors claim us to be. While the provincial government expanded their provincial financing for many other private local electors desires, our local taxes are only for specific children who must not be displaces or our entire democracy will come tumbling down. So, we do not want our collections confused with the consolidated provincial funds currently spent to favour Societies' ITA beneficiaries of our charity collectors. We do support responsible government and their Mistake of Positive Law, resulted in our 4 year olds being bused out of Oak Bay, due to our inability to be able to afford to offer them accessible free primary schools. And if we the richest members of any unelected city in our Regional unelected health, water and sewer District, cannot afford sufficient public elementary school spaces under our elected Rule of Law Regional Board, just" Imagine Canada", how bad the problem is for communities that have poor local electors waiting for their Justice Minister to obey our Positive Law, for the public interest ITA benefits of all Canadian children entitled to free schools in their country's provincial property school taxed local lands. Kathleen Maloney 1252 Beach Drive, Oak Bay Victoria School District, B.C. Canada V8S 2N3 2

5 Ms. Jill Graham 960 Cowichan St. Victoria, BC VBS 4E5 Building & Planning Department - Oak Bay Municipal Hall 2167 Oak Bay Avenue, Victoria BC, VBR 1G2 October 6, 2016 To Mayor and Council Re: The development of Glenlyon Norfolk School, 1701 Beach Drive, Victoria, BC Bylaw No As a teacher at GNS for the past 1 O years, I am writing on behalf of my colleagues, in support of this proposed building development. This revitalized school will allow our students to learn and grow in an environment more suited to their individual learning needs. With our incredible waterfront location as the focus of the new school, all students will have classrooms of a size to accommodate being able to spread out and learn in larger, warmer spaces. It will bring the school community together in one building, for the most part. The art teacher will be grateful for an area that gives children the space they need to create art without being limited to 18" of table space they now have. The library will be large enough to accommodate more than one grade at a time, making the area much more functional, and an epicenter of learning. Our music teacher and her students will love the new music space in the heritage Coach House building, giving them the room they need to create and enjoy music the way it should be done. What we love about the proposed school, is that we will get the space we need without compromising the beauty of the surroundings. We boast a wonderful sense of community in this little school, and we are excited about the changes. These improvements will build on the warmth and enjoyment of a community that shares and supports each other in their learning and growth. With this proposed new development, we will augment our already strong community spirit because the older and younger children will be in close proximity, fostering leadership, connection, and caring citizens. It is our sincere hope that you will endorse this proposal, as it will certainly enhance the best possible teaching and learning at GNS. Kind regards, Jill Graham