Fete to honor
city alderman

ALD. HARRY RANKIN

Friends and supporters of Harry

Rankin will honor the popular East-

End alderman with a Halloween
Banquet and Dance on Friday, Oct.
30. The celebration, sponsored by
the Committee of Progressive
Electors (COPE), will be held at
Maglio’s, 1739 Venables, beginning
at 6:30 p.m.

Tickets, which are $5.00 each, may
be obtained from COPE members or
from COPE Election Headquarters at
307 West Broadway, phone 876
8118. :

Guests will be entertained as well
to a concert of music and songs by
the well known Vancouver folk
singer, Tom Hawken.

oe co

WANT PROGRESSIVE REFORMS

Burnaby voters seek change —

By BEN SWANKEY

A strong demand for new
progressive reform policies and
more vigorous action to achieve
them were the dominant themes
at the Oct. 15 nomination
meeting of the Burnaby Citizens
Association.

This was reflected in the large
attendance of 361 members,
more than dquble that of last
year, in the enthusiastic
response to the speeches of the
successful candidates and in
the decisive rejection by the
membership of candidates con-
sidered too conservative mind
ed.

The BCA executive recom-
mended a slate of four aldermen
to the meeting — lawyer Joe
Corsbie, former MLA for the

CCF; former mayor Alan’

Emmott; businessman and
incumbent alderman Dave
Herd; and Gordon Smith, school
teacher.

All were decisively defeated.

Nominated from the floor and
elected were Mrs. Hazel
L’Estrange, retired school

teacher; lawyer and tenant.

leader John Motiuk; and trade
unionists Tom Constable of the
International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers and Colin
Snell of the Carpenters Union.

City’s assessments
favor big business

By ALD. HARRY RANKIN

Inequality of assessment
seems to be a built-in feature of
our whole system of assess-
ments on properties.

Home are assessed at close to
their true market value, as
provided for by legislation and
regulations.

But big commercial and
industrial properties are often
assessed at only a fraction of
their true market value, in
violation of the regulations.

The result is that homeowners
pay far more than their fair
share of taxes and big business
pays far less.

The glaring inequalities in
assessments have aroused a
good deal of public indignation.
Two citizens who are
courageously trying to correct
this injustice in the public
interest are Mrs. Alice
MacKenzie, secretary of the
Central Council of Ratepayers,
and architect Don Manning.

Mrs. MacKenzie pointed out in
her appeal to the assessment
court of revision that the land
assessment on her own property
at 2831 Cambie had been
increased from $14,840 in 1965 to
$23,135 this year, an increase of
56 percent.

She noted also that the land
assessment of an office building
only five blocks away at 337 West
Broadway, owned by mayor Tom
Campbell, had been dropped
from $8,500 in 1965 to $7,780 this
year, a decrease of 10 percent.

But she still lost her appeal.

Architect Don Manning, at a
considerable sacrifice of his
own time, energy and money, is
appealing the low assessment of
the properties held by the
Bayshore Inn and Four Seasons,
just north of Georgia Street, at
the entrance of Stanley Park.

Ree ee

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—FRIDAY, OCTOBER 23, 1970—PAGE 2 ©

properties are assessed at only
$5.7 million, yet their true
market value is near to $19
million. The owners should be
paying an additional $500,000 a
year in taxes.

Many more examples of
favoritism to big corporations
could be cited. :

The land assessment for
general purposes of the head
office of the Bank of Montreal at
500 Granville Street was $576,840
in 1950. By 1960 this had been
reduced to $456,960 and by 1969 it
was still only $489,800.

In other words the assessment
of the land held by this bank is
still 17 percent below the 1950
level. Just compare that with
how much the taxes on your
home have gone up since 1950.

American Can at 611
Alexander Street is. another
example. In 1950 its land was
assessed for general purposes at
$260,000. By 1960, this was
reduced to $208,000 and in 1969, it
was still at $208,000.

Much the same situation
applies to the big dpeartment
stores. The land assessment for
general purposes for Woodwards
and Eatons remained the same
for 1967, 1968 and 1969, while for
Hudson’s Bay it went up less
than three percent.

The officials who assess
properties are appointed by the
Bennett government and work
within the rules established by
that government. Their
salaries, however, are paid by
the city.

The trouble is that City Council
not only refuses to do anything to
try and correct these injustices,
it supports their perpetuation.

It’s obvious that citizen groups
concerned with equality and
fairness in assessment must
continue to press for: (a) an

SA Te Sar ys

In the first ballot the results of
the vote were: Hazel L’Estrange
246; John Motiuk 187; Tom Con-
stable 177; Alan Emmott 168;
Gordon Smith 161; Dave Herd
157; Colin Snell 153; Joe Corsbie
143; and Fraser Wilson 34.

The rules provided that candi-
dates must receive 50 percent of
the vote plus one to be elected.
The announcement of the elec-
tion of L’Estrange and Motiuk
was greeted with a round of
cheers and applause by the dele-
gates. Corsbie, Hered and
Emmott then withdrew and with
some of their followers left the
meeting. Their withdrawal
brought another round of ap
plause.

In the second ballot, with two
to be elected, Constable
received 197 votes, Snell 153 and
Smith 92.

In their two minute speeches
preceding the ballot, the four
successful candidates strongly
stressed the need for action to
bring jobs, build low cost hous-
ing, tax reform, pollution
control and tenant needs.

For school board candidates,
the BCA executive recom-
mended Beth Chobotuck, incum-
bent school trustee Mauris
Mann, and Cliff Murname. Nom-

inated from the floor were Orest
Moysiuk and Bill Burke.

The results of the voting were ‘

Beth Chobotuck 285, Mauris
Mann 255, Orest Moysiuk 235,

Cliff Murname 152, and Bill .

Burke 91. The first three were
declared elected. - ee

The BCA meeting also en-
dorsed an amendment to the
constitution, proposed by the
executive, providing that BCA
members who contest the munici-
pal elections other than as BCA
candidates, would have their
BCA membership terminated.

Since the nominating meeting
the BCA has been attacked by
both alderman Dave Herd and
Alan Emmott.

Herd is reported as having an-
nounced that he would try to
form a new party from among
defeated candidates Emmott,
Corsbie and Murname.

Alan Emmott, who resigned
as Burnaby mayor in 1968 to run
as mayoralty candidate in Van-
couver for TEAM which is
dominated by the Liberal Party,
made a red-baiting attack on the
BCA charging that many BCA
members were active in ‘‘Com-
munist circles’ and charging
also that the meeting was packed
by tenants and SFU students.

Observers point out, however,
that Emmott supporters
endeavored unsuccessfully to
pack the meeting and that as
soon as they failed in their ob-
jective they walked out, sug-
gesting that they were less inter-
ested in the BCA than in backing
Emmott.

Mayor Bob Prittie announced
that he would support the candi-
dates selected by the BCA
membership.

The desertion of the BCA by
one or more dissidents, who
looked on the BCA as a means to
achieve their own personal poli-

into unfair assessment
practices; (b) a re-assessment
of all big commercial and indus-
trial properties at their true
market value.

If this were done, it would be
possible to hold the line on taxes
on homes and perhaps even

reduce themsomewhat. «

tical ambitions, is not likely to
split the organization as some
newspaper headlines so glee-
fully suggest. 7s
The big influx of new members
into the BCA in the last two
years, the enthusiasm shown at

this year’s nominating meeting
and the type of candidates
chosen, which are represen-
tative of the community, auger
well for an election campaign
that could extend the BCA
majority on the school board to
the municipal council.

reedom under our ‘“‘free enterprise’ way-of-life is a

= fickle jade, much like an old Scottish observation

about ‘‘grippin (catching) fleas’’; now you have it, now you
don’t.

Reams of newspaper ‘rental’ advertisements illustrate the
point very well. Landlord ‘‘A” has.a suite to rent suitable for —
two gentlemen, but they must be non-smokers non-drinkers non-
entertainers, etc, etc.

If such ‘‘nons” are stuck for a roof above their heads, and
the price(in terms of money) relatively high in these modern
days, they must relinquish many freedoms in order to qualify.
And don’t forget the Shavian definition of a ‘‘gentleman’”’ as
one who disdains to shine his own shoes. That chore is for
menials only.

Then again a ‘‘pleasant suite’ is available to a young
couple ‘‘without children,” so young couples must of necessity
become total celebates, blow their spare cash on ‘‘the pill’ — °
or sleep outside, which is agin the law. A basic freedom nay, an’ ’
inalienable right is therefore cancelled at the whim of’ a ‘sub-- |
human landlord. .- : Oe BO. SEL 2k ae

Then.there is the ‘‘desirable apartment” with‘no ‘dogs,’ ”
cats, birds or other pets allowed. So before'a tenant nmioves’in, -
he or she must do away with Rover, probably the best friend he
or she ever had, ’all. because some grasping landlord’has banned |
all canine, feline or feathered species. Thus another freedom

. goes by the board.

Then we have a similar ‘‘Holy Willie’ edict which
prescribes ‘‘no parties,’ ‘‘no late guests,’’ etc, and the
observation of a strict ‘“‘quiet”’ after 10 p.m. What that type of
Shylock demands is the ‘‘quiet’’ of a graveyard, plus an-
extortionate rental to hire a pad in his domain.

Thus all the old-fashioned claptrap about an
‘“Englishman’s (or a Canadian) home being his castle”’ where:
his freedoms may not be curtailed or spurned has been rudely
shattered: In fact all shot to hell by a landlord class, of whom
Marx and Engels described by special specie of parasites in a
parasitic society.

Then we have another type of domicile with landlords and
landladies to match. A nice quite suite suitable for university
students, either sex, singly or in pairs (that is two boys or two
girls). Horrors to think it could be otherwise?

But the students applying (either sex) must have white
skins, — so-called Caucasians, or as Hitler defined it, “pure
Aryans.”

Of course, no mention is made of this ‘‘qualification” in the

‘advertisement, but let a Negro, an Indian, or others with

beautiful bronze skins, generally referred to as “colored”’

- apply, they are tartly informed that the suite “has been

rented,’ even when it is as empty as a politician’s promise
before election. But we are very circumspect in the necessity
of covering up our racisms; we don’t want to hurt the poor
dears, but we just won’t have colored people around the house.
They are so etc., etc. ad infinitum, ad nauseum! And so
another stinking ‘“‘freedom”’ goes down a landlord’s ‘stinking
drain. . . and all so virtuously.

Thus when we see a rental ad, as we often do, advising that
applicants must be ‘‘good Christians,” protestant preferred,”
we often feel that-a new Inquisition by grasping landlords in
their green for rent, interest and profit.

To top it all off, last week’s Vancouver Sun (Oct. 10
edition) carried an advt. (anything for a fast buck), inserted by
a so-called West End Apartment Tenants Association under the
caption ‘“‘No Haircut — No Welfare,’’ with Vancouver Mayor
Tom Campbell as the custodian of the ballot-box vote on this
despicable Hitlerite attack upon Vancouver’s young people.

The essence of this ‘‘vote”’ is to deprive all young people,
described as ‘‘long haired males, hobos, bums and tramps’”’ of
all welfare, jobs or other relief handouts, until they have hada
haircut. This is creeping Fascism with a vengeance, to say
nothing about the total abrogation of elementary freedoms for
Vancouver’s young people. And let no one by misled by this non-
existent ‘“‘Tenants Association’? or its seventeenth century
Gaglardi ‘‘solution’’ to a chronic and growing problem.

One would expect Mayor Campbell to publicly disassociate
himself from such fascist filth, but then that might be
expecting too much, a landlord class being what it is!

{