Developers score victory

in east end zoning fight

By ALD. HARRY RANKIN

The citizens of the Grandview
Woodlands Area won a secondary
victory at city council on March 22,
when council agreed to hold
public hearing on the issue of
down-zoning the area.

Actually for council to have done
otherwise would have been to
contravene city by-laws which call
for public hearings where rezoning
is involved: But a number of
aldermen, as well as mayor Jack
Volrich, wanted to settle the issue
without a hearing. When a huge
crowd of citizens gathered for a
public hearing on March 18 at
Britannia Secondary School,
Volrich told the crowd that the
meeting was an overflow. with
crowds jamming the corridor and

Poll shows ward support

A public opinion poll in Van-
couver’s Kitsilano area is in-
dicative of majority support in
Vancouver for a ward system,
COPE president Bruce Yorke said
this week.

The opinion poll was sponsored
by the Kitsilano Community
Forum, an umbrella organization
uniting 18 Kitsilano community
groups, in conjunction with the
March 22 debate on the ward
system between Harry Rankin and
May Brown.

Of 94 who filled out the
questionnaires, 84. favored the
introduction of a ward system in
Vancouver. A majority of those
who were in favor of a ward
system, preferred two aldermen
per ward.

“In 1973 a plebiscite was held in
Vancouver,’’ Yorke recalled, ‘at
that time 42 percent of those voting
favored the ward system. No doubt
that percentage would be much
higher today. Probably it would be
a majority.”

Yorke’s statements were made

in aregular column titled ‘Around
Vancouver” that is designed to
draw attention to key issues and
events.

The COPE leader called for a big
turnout to a public meeting on the
ward system issue, April 18 at 8
p.m. in the Britannia Centre. The
meeting will be in rooms 319 and
320 of the complex, situated at
Napier and Commercial Drive.

The public meeting follows the
city-wide conference held three
months ago at the Downtown
Eastside Residents Association
headquarters. About 60 Vancouver
organizations attended the con-
ference and elected a committee to

-prepare a comprehensive program

of action. The committee will
make its proposals for raising the
debate on the ward system at the
meeting.

COPE is urging community
organizations to send official
delegates to the meeting. In-
terested individuals are also in-
vited to attend.

“In my view the ward system

would restore the substance of
democracy into the civic electoral
scene,”’ Yorke said, ‘‘and pressure
should be organized to see that it is
introduced as quickly as possible.’’
In spite of TEAM’s official policy
favoring a ward system recent
developments have served to
undermine the basis of Vancouver
communities, Yorke said.

“Through the mayor’s office,
TEAM has tried to fire the head of
the city planning department,
because he conscientiously sup-
ports local planning,’’ Yorke
charged. ‘‘Today a lot of things
have changed. Effective area

planning has been abandoned in -

Kitsilano, in the West End, in
Champlain Heights, in Grand-
VIEW. vst

The COPE president said: that
the ‘‘main plan” for a ward system
should be to follow the example of
Kitsilano and take ‘‘the question of
the ward system back into the
communities for discussion and
debate.”

as such it presented a danger in
case of fire.

Legally and technically he was
correct, but I suspect that this was
only the excuse; his real reason
was that he didn’t want to face up
to a political fight in which hesand
his TEAM-NPA right wing
coalition might come off second
best.

But the major victory at city
council’s meeting on March 22
went to the developers when city
council voted to rezone the area for
townhouse development instead. of
for duplex development. This was
a slap in the face to city planning
director Ray Spaxman, to the
citizen’s planning committee
established by council and to the
citizens in the area who want it to
remain a family residential area.

The central issue in the Grand-
viéw-Woodlands controversy is the
direction of future development of
the area. Will it be a family-
oriented area? (This was the
concept when the city spent $10
million to build the Britannia
Community Complex). Or will it be
transformed into an area of
apartment buildings with one

bedroom and bachelor apart-:

ments?

. The developers, with the backing
of some homeowners (including
absentee landlords), want to build
such apartments and. many ap-
plications from them have poured
into city hall. If they have their
way, scores of perfectly good
houses will be demolished to make
way for apartments.

The residents of the area, led by
Doug Laalo, president of the
Grandview Woodlands Tenants
Association, want to keep it a
family area. In this they were
backed by. the city planning
director Max Spaxman and the
area citizens planning committee.

Since the area is already zoned for
apartments, the residents want it.

downzoned to ban apartments.
That’s the situation that faces
the NPA-TEAM majority on

council. Wanting to let the
developers have their way, but
fearing widespread public

criticism if they did so openly, the
TEAM-NPA majority on council

passed a motion torezone it, not for

duplexes only as the residents
wanted, but for townhouses. This is
the foot in the door that the

developers want. There is no doubt —
in my mind at all that after the

public hearing, the TEAM-NPA
majority on council will let the
developers have their way.

What many people still don’t
know is why so many developers
all of a sudden want to build so

many apartments in this area. The -

answer lies in the new joint
federal-provincial Assisted Rental
Program recently announced by
the provincial government. It will
provide generous ‘subsidies “up to
$3,000 per year per suite to
developers. Not only that, this new
legislation will provide tax shelters
that will enable people with money
to show losses on apartment
construction and so avoid paying
income tax on other investments.
Here is what Concost Con-
sultants recently said in an en:
thusiastic letter to developer:
about this new legislation.
“Assisted Rental Program
developments thereby offer ex-
tremely attractive opportunities

for investors having high un-—

sheltered incomes from other
sources.”

“... annual operating sub-—

sidies up to $3,000 per year, in the
form of grants and interest free

loans, will be made available to

investors in new rental housing.’

“The object is to. .
rent controls.’

ss . investors having taxable
incomes of $23,000 to. $51,000 can
avoid paying from 33 percent to 43
percent of this in current taxes
where a_ full
available.”’

It is further pointed out that
profits, after taxes, for developers
: See RANKIN, pg. 11

Ee

Vander Zalm: spy in the toilet bow!

. phase out —

tax shelter is

By MAURICE RUSH

f you thought human resources minister Bill Vander

‘Zalm had reached bottom in his attack on the aged,
sick, poor and handicapped you were wrong. The real
bottom was reached last week when he released his ‘‘fact
sheet” on the study of the bowel movements of those
unfortunate citizens who depend on the provincial
government’s Pharmacare program.

Not content with cutting back on every social services _

program in B.C., our resourceful human resources
minister has crawled into the biffies of the poor to spy on
their bowel movements to discover how he can cut back
the government’s free laxative drug program while
producing the same end result.

His study has come up with the world-shaking discovery
that “laxatives produced an average of 0.44 bowel
movements per day at a cost of seven cents, while bran
produced 0.61 bowel movements at a cost of 0.2 cents.”

Now, isn’t that something? Who would have known? I.

wonder how much it cost the provincial government for
that study? :

Now that Vander Zalm has established the “fact” that
satisfactory bowel movements can be brought on by other
than prescription drugs, he can proceed to justify cut-
backs in free drugs under the new Pharmacare program.
The logic of his latest discovery is that instead of paying
for laxative drugs for the aged and poor, the provincial
government should provide each needy person with a box
of bran cereal every week.

That, according to Vander Zalm’s study, will save the
government millions of dollars a year. In fact, says his
report, an estimated $7 million worth of Pharmacare
prescription drugs ‘‘could be flushed down the toilet and
end up in the Fraser or Juan de Fuca Strait”’ this year. -

The “‘fact sheet,” says Vander Zalm, proves the need
for changing the present Pharmacare program and
putting an end to the idea that the public (meaning in this
case the aged and poor) should expect ‘‘something for

ere ”’ This is the old familiar oS of the Socreds under -

PACIFIC TRIBUNE— APRIL 1, 1977- ~Pooe 2 RES S

which they have boosted rates for public services, taking
an estimated $1 billion out of the pockets of the people,
while at the same time cutting back on every social
welfare program.

Having attacked those he called ‘“‘the welfare bums” for
many months, Vander Zalm is now turning his attention
and energies to saving the government money on the
bowel movements of the aged and poor. His ‘‘fact sheet”
proves the contention made in this column two weeks ago,

that the provincial government intends to change the.

Pharmacare program to eliminate free prescription
drugs for many people now getting them, and to subsidize
the program by cutting back free drugs to the needy by
millions of dollars a year.

Indications are that the government has been forced to
reexamine its plans after the public outcry which
followed disclosure of the scheme. But let’s not be fooled.
Vander Zalm intends to follow through with his over-all
scheme, even though he may have to make some small
changes to make it less obnoxious.

- Setting himself up as an expert on medical questions,
“doctor’’ Vander Zalm’s “fact sheet’’ is a thinly-veiled
attack on the medical profession. One wonders, in all this,
whereare the men in white, the defenders of public health
and the Hippocratic Oath? Not one has spoken out against
Vander Zalm’s threat to revise the Pharmacare program.

‘Either the medical profession is intimidated, pre-
occupied with making money, or just doesn’t have the «.

guts to speak out.

* * * he RS

In a different league than Vander Zalm’s attack on the
bowel movements of the poor, but nevertheless producing ~~

much the ‘same end product, is the continuing campaign

against the Soviet Union on human rights. But in: the

socialist countries every citizen is guaranteed the human
right to full medical and dental care throughout their
lives, including the supply of free drugs and services.

Here’s a human right socialism guarantees to people

which Vander Zalm and the Socred government would
take away. These champions of human rights don’t
recognize this as a right — only as something to be given
or taken away depending on the whim of a capitalist

government or ambitious politician who is anxious to °

build a political career on the suffering of the poor and
unfortunate in our society.

In more than 40 years in politics and the progressive
movement I have never known a case where the bowel
movements of the poor was made an issue of by a
politician. Among his many other accomplishments, here
is ‘a first for Vander Zalm. He is proving that excrement
can be used not only to fertilize gardens, but also the
political career of a ruthless, cold-hearted but ambitious
politician.

After giving.us his solution for the crisis of Con- °
federation — “‘let French Canada go, then we can take
French off our corn flakes boxes’? — Vander Zalm now
offers us a solution to the Pharmacare crisis: ‘cheaper
bowel movements for the poor through eating bran.” You
must admit, B.C.’s cereal-minded’ human resources
minister is not your average capitalist politician. He’s
more dangerous than most because he aims to make a
career out of turning society against its victims, the poor

and dispossessed. In his sick mind, they are the enemy
ves at our gates.

TRIBUNE

Editor - MAURICE RUSH
Assistant Editor SEAN GRIFFIN.
Business and Circulation Manager — FRED WILSON

Published weekly at Ford Bldg., Mezzanine’No. 3, .
. 193 E. Hastings St., Vancouver 4, B.C. Phone 685-8108

“Subscription Rate: Canada, $8.00 one year; $4.50 for six months,

All other countries, $10.00 one year
Second class mail registration number 1560