_. Municipal workers in Greater Vancouver escalated picketing actions this week in response to the tough stand of the Greater Vancouver Regional District’s labor relations committee which Mondy rejected out of hand the union’s counter offer and broke off negotiations. (See Labor Comment, page 12, for details) However in a Tribune survey of elected municipal officials many Lower Mainland aldermen On the labor relations committee and negotiator Graham Leslie to get back to the bargaining table. An angered Canadian Union of Public Employees and Van- Couver Municipal and Regional Employees Union Tuesday Tevoked all picket passes for Van- Couver city hall previously issued to the mayor, aldermen and media. CUPE took similar ac- tions last week in Surrey. _ The picket line forced cancella- tion of the city council meeting as the three COPE aldermen and Don Bellamy respected the line: Mayor Mike Harcourt was jeered and attempting to convene the Meeting of council. “The mayor and council Members will now have to decide whether they are friends of labour and will respect a legal picket line,”’ the unions said in a joint Statement. ‘‘This decision has been arrived at in response to the GVRD labor relations depart- en refusing to negotiate with disassociated themselves with the hard line of the GVRD and called - by strikers for crossing the line us. We earlier parted the line so that Mayor Harcourt could honor his commitment to work publicly to re-open negotiations. We have seen no evidence that he has been willing or able to exert any influence.” “The time has arrived when we must apply escalating and max- imum pressure- on the elected aldermen and mayors to get the GVRD back to the bargaining TOM BAKER... .”My pos is that | want negotiations to continue.’< table,”> VMREU spokesman George Kowbel said on the picket line Tuesday. “The unions are forced to make decisions like this,’” COPE alderman Bruce Eriksen said, “The COPE aldermen are en- dorsed by labor and we don’t cross picket lines.” - ¢ “Tt is just not good enough for the GVRD to break off negotia- tions when a counter offer has been made, That was the time for the GVRD to show good faith by making a move itself,” said COPE alderman Bruce Yorke. Harcourt was under obvious pressure as a result of the union action and in a conciliatory move accepted a union offer to meet directly with Vancouver city council to explain in detail the union’s demands. Harcourt had earlier rejected such a meeting, which was supported only by the COPE aldermen. “Or proposal all along has been to get the unions before council to explain their position. I am expecing that meeting to take place now,” said Yorke. Other elected officials con- tacted by the Tribune also ex- ‘pressed a desire to hear the union’s position directly, and all complained of being denied in- formation about the progress of negotiations. “TJ don’t agree with Parks (chairman of the GVRD labor relations committee) when he says there is no sense negotiating. That isn’t a good position to get this dispute settled. It is a lousy bargaining position,’’ Burnaby alderman Fred Randall said. Randall claimed that. he receives only the-skimpiest of reports from Burnaby’s repre- sentatives on the GVRD labor re- lations committee and that he has been kept unaware of the union’s concerns. : “T haven’t heard the union’s side and I don’t know if our. bargaining representatives are doing a good job. I would like to hear the union speak directly to council.” New Westminster - alderman Tom Baker also complained of being kept in the dark. ‘‘We have not been getting information. And when we get information it is after the fact. - “*My position is that I want the negotiations to continue.” Baker said that there are others | on New Westminster council, noteably alderman Francis, who also want an immediate resump- tion of negotiations. North Vancouver district. alderman Emie Crist called for the GVRD to initiate a resump- tion of bargaining in an in camera motion two weeks ago. The mo- tion failed, four to three, with aldermen Gordon Rose and Mary Seagal supporting Crist. ‘Refusing to negotiate is an untenable position for a public employer,”’ said Crist, “I think we are going to have to get out of that GVRD set up. It is responsi- -ble for this whole mess. We should resolve our differences with our employees and neighbors here in our own municipality.”’ - Port Coquitlam alderman Len Traboulay said bluntly “‘I am not happy with the hard line currently held by the GVRD labor relations - committee.” CUPE has been on strike in Port Coquitlam for six weeks, several weeks longer than elsewhere. Although the Port Co- quitlam CUPE local has its own collective’ agreement with the _changed by the local Port Co- me to be a part of that.” should be trying to influence the labor relations committee to position.”’ say ‘when they are hungry enough . . .’ That isn’t a decent way to treat public workers.”’ controversial issue and Monday he declared from Victoria that Aldermen tell GVRD to get back to table. | municipality, the municipality has employed the GVRD labor relations department as its negotiators. A condition of using the GVRD labor relations depart- ment, however, is that any final agreement must be ratified by the GVRD’s mayors’ committee. And that has Traboulay furious. “The present stand off can’t by quitlam council. Any settlement that we make which is out of line with what the GVRD wants will be vetoed. It bothers and angers Traboulay said that elected of- ficials throughout the GVRD “move away from its hard line “I don’t think municipal employers should be acting like big multinational corporations and using tactics like B.C. Telephone and Nabob,”’ he said. “I’ve heard some GVRD people Socred municipal affairs minister Bill Vander Zalm ap- parently couldn’t prevent himself from speaking out of turn on a any aldermen who refuse to cross picket lines should resign. Traboulay scorned Vander Zalm labelling his statements ‘udicrous.”’ “‘I will never be a strikebreaker or union buster for the sake of political office,” he said. i e, .. The B.C. Assessment Author- Ity’s court of revision reserved decision Monday on the challenge by North Vancouver District acti- vist Betty Griffin against the pro- Perty tax assessments of three large chemical companies on Bur- TardInlet. - _The court of revision and a higher appeal body, the board of appeal, have traditionally been €arn their retainer fees by having the Property taxes of large busi- Ness reduced. ' - However with the challenge in Burnaby last year against the as- | 4nd with Griffin’s challenge in North Vancouver, the appeal Process is being transformed into _| @ battleground for fair property taxation. Millions of dollars in municipal and school taxes are at Stake. Griffin brought appeals gainst the assessments of Hook- €r Chemicals (Canadian Occi- dental Petroleum), Erco Indus- "| tries and Mohawk Petroleum on behalf of a North Vancouver citi- zens’ committee, the Committee for Fair Assessments. As representatives of the North Van Chemical Hazards Commit- N campaigning to have Hook- ‘relocated, anda battery of cor- Porate lawyers looked on, Griffin and aide Richard Blackburn ar- Sued to the court that the three adjacent industrial properties Were assessed at least three times to low, Griffin’s well researched case traced the assessment history of’ One parcel of land sold by Hooker \'0 Mohawk in 1979. Mohawk forums for corporate lawyers to ° Sessments of the Shell oil refinery - tee, a citzens’ group which has - bought the land in two parcels, each of which was assessed at a different rate. In 1980 the chemi- cal company. consolidated the parcels again and then had the as- sessment reduced by over $500,- 000. The sale price of the largest parcel of land sold to Mohawk by Hooker should serve as a base for evaluating all of the adjacent lands, she contended. And that would increase the assessed mar- ’ ket value of Hooker’s land by ‘over $3 million or by one-third, and by asimilar amount to Erco’s land. - _ “The assessor started from an incorrect premise to arrive at 1981 assessments,”’ Griffin said. Hooker’s 1981 land assess- ‘ments increased only marginally, by 5.6 percent. Erco’s land values inflated at the same rate. How- - ever average industrial properties in North Vancouver inflated at 1 2 percent and single family resi- dences inflated at 65 percent. - There was a dispute over Mo- hawk’s assessments as Griffin charged that the 1981 assessment was less than a one percent in- crease over 1980. ‘‘That is totally unacceptable,’’ she told ‘the court. The assessor and Mohawk _ claimed a larger increase had act- ually been given, but the figures they used did not match those which Griffin took from the as- sessment rolls. a The most i har pai ae against the chemical compan was based on a report to the Dis- trict of North Vancouver muni- cipal council prepared by DPA consultants. peaee The report, commissioned by benefits of moving Hooker out of the District, cited replacement costs for the chemical company’s plant and machinery of $82 mil- lion, not including land. The as- sessor valued the plant and ma- chinery at $35 million. To the obvious displeasure of. Hooker’s lawyers, Griffin read from the DPA report which cited Hooker’s argument to the Dis- trict that its plant and machinery was actually worth $150 million. Immediately following Grif- fin’s presentation, the assessor moved to have the case dismissed on the basis that Griffin had pre- sented no evidence which he should meet with counter evi- dence. Strangely, the motion was re- jected because two of the com- panies, Hooker and Erco, had appeals of their own pending to lower their assessments. The chairman reserved ruling on the BETTY GRIFFIN (right), RICHARD BLACKBURN ... before North Vancouver court of revision to challenge tax assess- ments of Hooker, Erco and Mohawk chemical companies. . ~ properties until all the appeals are heard. The assessor’s curt attempt to dismiss Griffin’s case focused at- _ tention on a broader issue involv- ed in the appeals — the role of the Assessment Authority itself. A crown corporation, the authority is charged with the responsibility _ of ensuring fair assessments. However when a third party pre- sents evidence that an industrial assessment is too low, and there- fore all other taxpayers are paying too much, the assessor aggres- sively ‘‘defends” the initial as- sessment in a partisan manner, in effect, protecting the company. Griffin opened her presenta- tion with a sharp rebuke of the as- sessor for ‘‘open intimidation’ and for refusing easy access to in- formation. At one point she was asked her political affiliation at the assessor’s office, she charged. The chairman of the court of SON TRIBUNE PHOTO—FRED ! Chemical companies’ taxes 3X too low revision, Mr. Edward Palmer, former senior vice-president of A. E. Lepage real estate company, on several occasions showed his bias as well, challenging Griffin’s contention that industrial land as a whole was undervalued in as- sessments. : ‘I’m in the real estate business,’’ he thundered at one point to claim a higher authority. “You sound like you’re in real es- |. tate,’’ Griffin shot back. The whole procedure was only a trial run, however, as the case will be appealed by the losing side }- to the board of appeal which will open hearings in about two mon- ths. ‘ Burnaby activist Dave Fairey’s appeal against the 1981 assess- ments of three Shell Oil proper- ties, two Gulf Oil properties and two Chevron Oil properties on Burrard Inlet will go before the Court of Revision Feb. 23. It is likely that the court will de- cline to hear the case and refer it directly to the board of appeal. In the meantime Fairey has asked the provincial ombudsman to intervene in his challenge against the 1980 assessments of - Shell by requiring the Assessment Authority to release the data on which the 1980 assessments were based. Fairey’s lawyer Jack Wood- ward is presently filing papers with the B.C. Supreme Court in an attempt to have the 1980 ruling upholding Shell’s assessments overturned on the basis that the board of appeal went beyond its jurisdiction in refusing Fairey the right to examine the assessor’s the District to examine the cost © 6% eH Ree PACIFIC-TRIBUNE—FEB..20, 1981—Page 3 bcnshascontsit ceatilalbe OPUION a tata etc 1 a a sitit |