anonymous - October 23rd, 2005
In the words of our Hawaiian mayor, Ken should never run for mayor as he is too negative and too inflexible. If elected nothing will get done.

anonymous - October 23rd, 2005
I would rather have a person who is consistent and has a consience sitting in the mayors chair. I think one trait that Ken displays is his willingness to listen. I can think of other candidates for Mayor who are to busy thinking about their perception of what you want to hear so they may respond to the conversation, rather than the issue at hand. Between the Shock and awe, the look at my connections and look at me candidates, Ken stands up to the test of time displaying honesty. We are at a critical time in our history,and need a person we can trust.

anonymous - October 23rd, 2005
I can think of three things to say about Ken for mayor, No, No, No.
At least it's consistent with Ken's answers about everything over his term on council! We need someone in the Mayors seat that will say Yes to helping Whistler out of it's present state of mediocrity!

anonymous - October 23rd, 2005
I agree that we can trust Ken….. to vote No, as he recently did on the function junction housing project. No to the Olympics. (Whistler was conceived to host the Olympics.) Send difficult decisions off to consultants, and then reject them. The last council would avoid making a decision, at any cost. It was up to each councilor to show some team building skills and work together. This did not happen. It is easier to say “No” or defer the decision. Look at the arena. Still No binding decision. No to retail competition and affordability. Defer to study retail habits in Europe, and then vote No to London Drugs. Help keep retail prices high.

In the immortal words of Ted Milner, (after the Olympic Vote) … “Councillor Melamed …lives in a very grey, depressing world, and I don’t agree with him.”

anonymous - October 24th, 2005
If councillors are expected to say yes to everything that comes to the table, why have them?

anonymous - October 24th, 2005
If councillors are going to say no to everything why have them.

anonymous - October 24th, 2005
I like Ken because he comes across as being 100% genuine. It’s neat to have a politician with the backbone to make decisions that aren’t necessarily in the best interests of big business.
Good for you.

Jamey Kramer

anonymous - October 24th, 2005
I am concerned about the amount of council decisions made in private, without the ability for public discussion.
Ken believes that the in camera meetings are important.Quote from Ken Melamed July 21 2005 Whistler Question “There is a need to have sensitive issues discussed outside the public eye.”

I believe all public business should be done in the open. After all, it is the law. What is council trying to hide from us? The arena process is a good example of the danger of closed door meetings.

anonymous - October 25th, 2005
Ken did the right thing when he voted against the Olympics as well as the housing in function. The Olympics is causing us enormous nightmares already. He thinks long term not just in the immediate.

anonymous - October 26th, 2005
We cannot elect Ken as his whole platform is contradictory.
He is rightly critiqued for being anti-everything, indecisive, overly analytical etc...
Ken says he will be different (more balanced) if he is elected Mayor. So a Guy who plays the "higher standard" card says that he will change his almighty stance? All of you who supported Ken in the past will be dissapointed by the new Ken if he does what he says.

anonymous - October 26th, 2005
Ken lite? v2.0?

anonymous - October 26th, 2005
Whistler has been Ken's backyard for over 30 years. He never left like some people. I wouldn't be jumping to say yes every time some pro-development, Bush/Nebbeling style money hungry slick politician got greased to build something that only benefited certain interest groups. Thanks for protecting my back and my Whistler too, Ken. You and my cirlce of Whistler friends have our votes, 100% !!!

anonymous - October 27th, 2005
wow some people critical of Ken on this page really don't have much to offer but sarcasm. As a local here for 30 years THANK GOD we have had someone like Ken with integrity, a backbone willing to stand up for what he believed was right even if it was unpopular. His witholding support for the Olympics looks visionary now. The rest of council, like all self interested politicians, can't resist legacy opportunities..helps them think they made important contributions with their names splattered all over it...regardless of cost!

anonymous - October 27th, 2005
GO KEN GO!!!!
WE LOVE YOU!!!
WHISTLER NEEDS YOUR PASSION, PROVEN FORESIGHT AND COMMITMENT TO THIS COMMUNITY.
"JUST SAY NO" TO OUT OF CONTROL DEVELOPMENT AND BAD DECISIONS, IF IT PROTECTS US AND OUR CHILDREN'S FUTURE HERE. WE WANT THEM TO STAY! IT'S OK. VOTE KEN ON THE 19th!

anonymous - October 27th, 2005
I believe that as a councilor, Ken Melamed had to stand up for the voices of those constituents who voted for him. Most being those who would want little or no development ,and questions asked of every issue that came before him. I also truly believe that Ken, as a mayor, will be equally as conscientious for ALL citizens. He CAN address the needs of those who feel we need guidance to get us out of this dismal financial period we are in , I know he will. Perhaps that is exactly why he is more on board with the arena issue, indeed why he is more on board with many of those issues he was so oppposed to before. I personally think people are looking for a saviour, when all we really need is some snow, but in any case, Ken has my vote. He is the only HONEST politician here.

anonymous - October 27th, 2005
Ok, what have you done with the REAL Ken Melamed? The statements made by video clips on his website prove to be completely contradictory to his record. Can a leopard really lose his spots...I smell a big RAT!

anonymous - October 27th, 2005
The above statement has been posted by the opposition. Getting nervous?

whistler - October 27th, 2005
Post deleted due to improper content.

anonymous - October 28th, 2005
I was directly involved in the information campaign around the Olympic bid.
Did a MOUNTAIN of research and shared what I found on our web site, and
on frequent radio and TV interviews.

Based on my extensive research of Games going back to 1984, Ken was the ONLY
council member who demonstrated a clear understanding of ALL the implications of
hosting the Olympics, implications we are just beginning to experience.

It was obvious to those of us involved at the time that Ken's vote wasn't against the
Olympics - it was savvy vote FOR making sure Whistler got maximum benefit out of the
leverage he knew we would only have once - BEFORE we voted to support the bid.

He took a hit for his position. But he didn't care, because he was convinced it was in
the best interests of the community.

THAT'S the kind of politician I want. They don't come around very often.

So let the others use their "Karl Rove" tactics of trying to label Ken. I know that when
he votes, he always votes FOR a Whistler that will be the best place to live,
the best place to work, and the best place to visit.

Van Powell

anonymous - October 28th, 2005
Nice to see someone attaching their name to comments on this site other than individuals running for office; thanks Van Powell and thanks Duane for creating the site. I would like to see a higher level of conversation on what should be a very useful tool. Ken is not going to destroy the Town and neither is Ted. They have very different styles and ideas which will influence the policy direction in the hall and on council.

Pick your top four or five issues and go out and talk to Ken, Ted and the others running for council. Post your concerns on this sight or the candidates sites.

Are the only people visiting this site closely connected to the candidates? Fear is a powerful motivator but we can do better can’t we?

Stuart Munro

anonymous - November 02nd, 2005
Ken
Rainbow lands rezoning is taking forever what would you do as Mayor to cut through the red tape?
Stuart Munro

anonymous - November 08th, 2005
Ken, why behind closed doors today Nov 7th did you send the Rainbow project back and not give it the go ahead it deserves. And why in a closed session?

How can you say you are for affordable housing when you continually block this project. I have many friends on the waiting list, and I am now going to tell them why I cannot support you for mayor and why they should not either!

Please explain why you did what you did today and put it out in the open!!!

anonymous - November 08th, 2005
Was the Rainbow project killed today at an in-camera meeting? More red tape? Quote form Ken: “There is a need to have sensitive issues discussed outside the public eye". (Whistler Question) Why not let the public have a look? Hockey anyone?

anonymous - November 08th, 2005
Maybe he doesn't want the public to see the developers for what they really are: unbelievably greedy people, with ZERO concern for their fellow citizens. The Rainbow project is designed to satisfy an immediate demand, but ignores any future considerations. They want to build a COMMUNAL parking lot for the single- family home owners( the only section I have seen). That means that mothers/fathers with children will have to try and unload groceries (or whatever)and said children ,and walk a fair distance to their homes.Anyone with kids will understand the dilemma.Forget trying to change a tire or a spark plug in your driveway, or watch your kids draw beautiful chalk drawings. They say that they want to encourage Transit use so they are also limiting parking stalls. RUBBISH! Indeed, I use transit, but I STILL NEED THE EXTRA VEHICLES AND SPACE for whatever use. PLUS,The parking stalls they want to build are 2/3 the size of typical Whistler vehicles:pick ups and SUVs. Spare me the cry for smaller vehicles- I night consider it if they put a barrier up the whole sea- to-die highway. The "single family homes" they are proposing are only slightly larger than any existing "employee housing" townhomes:1300-1700 square feet. Just great if your a family of four, five or six. The rediculous list goes on and on ad nauseum..... The Rainbow site is a developer's dream, and a home owner's nightmare. The needs of future Whistler residents are not being addressed at all in this development. This is not a place where people will be happy. Forget your snowmobiles( YES we have them, lots of them- seen all the pick ups with them in the back?)your kayaks, your bikes, your motorcycles, your boats ,your camper trailers and oh yes, your KIDS vehicles('cause they'll have them in ten years for sure ).You can't have them at Rainbow (if it goes through) and God forbid that you should be able to live a normal, decent life here in Whistler. It's only for those who were lucky enough to buy here twenty years ago and are under some weird impression that they can dictate the way everyone else in Whistler should live. I say, go ahead Ken ,please vote NO to Rainbow. Let Rod Nodeau and Anne Chiasson come up with a better plan- one that addresses the needs of the real future of Whistler: Us.

anonymous - November 09th, 2005
I believe the building was designed to meet the new 2020 guidelines. These guidelines are anti-car in nature. Take the bus, walk home, ride your bike, etc. What would the new PAN guidelines say about Sleds? This project was not stalled because the parking issues. We know how strongly Ken feels about Whistler 2020. You might ask him about parking for your sleds.

anonymous - November 09th, 2005
I think it's unfortunate that several of the recent posts attempt to single out Ken as trying to quash the Rainbow project, and doing it behind closed doors in camera. Folks, my understanding is that ALL the councillors agreed to go in camera on this as financial negotiations are underway - who pays for what in this 150mio dollar project. Nobody is trying to kill Rainbow, just to protect the taxpayer. Thats what they get paid for.
Hey bloggers, sign your names. It started with the Group of (unnamed) Concerned Citizens in August and now this forum has created a happy home for those who prefer to hide in the shadows. The darkness looks good on you, it suits you well.
Eckhard Zeidler

anonymous - November 09th, 2005
Yes, interesting, isn't it, that those who make the most scathing,
personal attacks are usually the ones too scared to sign their names.

What are they hiding? What are they afraid of? If they truly believe their opinions will result in a better Whistler, why don't they 'own' them?

So little integrity. So sad.

Cudos to all of you who sign your name. Whatever your position -
YOU are the ones I will trust to carry Whistler to an even better place.

Van Powel

anonymous - November 09th, 2005
Hey anonymous Dude I can understand your frustration. Anyone who has lived in this city for more than a few years has had the same problems. You're not the only one not to get exactly what you want.. Where's your mommy anyway? You're probably too young and inexperienced to know that people here 20 years ago got off there asses and did something about it. They got together and bought land and took the risk of rezoning property, forming a company and developing it for themslves only to find out that the interest rates had gone to 22% and real estate values had dropped. Are you willing to take that risk Dude?
To lose money and still stay here to develope affordable housing for the next generation? That's where all this resident housing started. To help guys like you. Well look at the big picture buddy nobody owes you nothin .. even if you do live a decent life. How about helping instead of complaining.. Get involved and you'll learn that it's not as simple as you are. You don't know how lucky you've got it.
Bruce Watt

anonymous - November 09th, 2005
I have been reading this blog for quite a while now , and I'm really frustrated with some people. Please remember that we are all neighbors and are striving for basically the same thing: a healthy,prosperous and inviting resort town. Please stop the critical garbage and name-calling, and move on to some constructive ideas! Some of these sites are unbelievable!
Heidi Rode

anonymous - November 09th, 2005
The Rainbow project is being designed by a team of highly skilled professionals working for both the developer and the Resort Municipality of Whistler. These people are dedicated to our community and are working hard to produce a the best plan possible that will be good for our community and the people who will live in the Rainbow neighborhood. The Whistler 2020 guidelines are being used as the basis for the planning of the project to ensure that the Rainbow neighborhood will be a healthy community that local residents will be proud to live in. If anybody would like any current information on the plans for the Rainbow neighborhood I can be contacted at rnadeau@telus.net or through the comments section on the Rainbow web site at www.rainbowatwhistler.ca I look forward to speaking with anyone who has constructive suggestions on how to make Rainbow the best new neighborhood in Whistler.
Rod Nadeau
Whistler Rainbow Properties Ltd.

anonymous - November 09th, 2005
Sorry Heidi, my ego got the best of me. But my point still stands if you want change get involved. I appologize for the name calling.(eventhough I don't know who it is.)
Think about it.. 500 people on the waiting list put in $2,000 each that's a good down payment on an unzoned development site.
Maybe even in the athelete's village you could design the kind of place you want. It might take five years but you might get exactly what you want. For God's sake if you feel that strongly about it Do something. My personal feeling is that the Government is too booged down in buracratic manuvering to get creative...let's be creative again.
BW

anonymous - November 10th, 2005
Hey Duanne, While I respect B. Watt's opinion I'm starting to wonder how some of his posts keep getting posted since they are quite nasty. I think Mr. Watt should be a little more respectful of others. I may take heat for this, I really don't care. Kelly Richards

whistler - November 10th, 2005
Hi Kelly,
Bruce Watt seems to have come close to the line but he has not been swearing. He has also toned it down a bit more recently. I think he has made some good points that we may forget about as time goes by. Also we would like to hear everyone's opinions even the long-term locals, so his input and yours is appreciated. Duane
Oh and one more thing, I admire you both for signing you names to your posts as that takes guts and shows that you both care about these issues, although your opinions may differ.

anonymous - November 10th, 2005
Ken,
I'd like to ask you about some of your recent comments regarding the proposed Rainbow development. You said " I think the current plan allows for too much commercial space, it just FEELS to be too much". Ken, In keepin with pretty much everything you and this present council has overseen, the amount of commercial space has been studied, some would say overstudied, and the studies support the proposed amount of commercial space, in fact even more commercial space. Yet, you are weighing in on the development saying it just "feels" like its too much. Ken, this development is pretty much in keeping with a "sustainable development" more commercial space will actually result in less vehicular traffic, thats a GOOD thing. I realize you find it difficult to find anything GOOD from a development, but you really need to step back and analyze things for what they are instead of what you "feel" they are. I want a leader in the mayor seat that actually reads the mountains of studies that are paid for, then decides based on facts, not feelings. Let the professionals point of view known so you can at least justify the costs of studying everything at nasuem.

anonymous - November 10th, 2005
Interesting how we are all hanging around Ken's site...I have to agree with Kramer. I think that Mother Nature is playing a far more important role in our economy than we care to admit (it will be interesting to see the attendance at Beijing if SARS and the Avian flu are still circulating). It is so easy to point fingers and lay blame when we are in a very bad place, but continuously accusing council for all our woes smacks of Salem. We can't deny that poor/no snowfall has at least contributed to an atmosphere of a "poor us " reverie.
Thank goodness WB did indeed fight hard to keep our heads up and our integrity intact last year. Last weekend marked the beginning of a new ski/boarding season, and my understanding is that the line up was full of enthusiastic, positive and cheerful people who believed that this year will be different, this year The Tourists will come, this year WE WILL HAVE SNOW! And I agree with them. But I also believe that for those rainy days, we need to have many more attractions available to our guests.I don't think we can ignore the need to build infrastucture for such ammenities as an outdoor skating rink (think Beaver Tails, hot chocolate and good old-fashioned fun) , indoor arena/concert hall/education facility, outdoor pool, whatever.....Our guests need many choices of activities when they come here and I feel that we need to address such issues with open minds. I think that Ken may have had some very valid reasons for saying no to some things. But I'm wondering if perhaps as a Mayor, he may be more concerned with the needs of the community as a whole. And by the way Blogger number one, I don't think that's quite true.
Heidi Rode

anonymous - November 12th, 2005
With all due respect, Stewart, if Ken "got it”, the Rainbow development would have gone to first reading long ago. ‘Just say no’.

anonymous - November 12th, 2005
I'm not sure why some ill-informed folks are trying to pin the issues with Rainbow on Ken. He has already spoken out in favour of seeing this develpment move forward. Remember that Ken has ONE vote. What of the other councillors? There are a number of serious problems with Rainbow. Do some homework.
Andrew T.

whistler - November 13th, 2005
Comment deleted due to immproper content.

anonymous - November 13th, 2005
Thanks Andrew T. Yes, there are issues to be resolved on Rainbow - as they will be. I'm willing to work double time to get there right out of the starting gate. Anyone else?
I'm trying hard to keep an open mind about the mayors race because the mayor appoints to committees, there is some serious work to be done in the next 3 years and I don't want to be sidelined - but this trying to stick Kenny with the "NO TO RAINBOW" label is lame and it's plain wrong.
Eckhard Zeidler

anonymous - November 13th, 2005
Fair enough, Eckhard. Who should the complete inaction on affordable housing the last six years be pinned to? Staff? Council? Hugh? The vision thing? Right, it is nobody’s responsibility! Why not blame the media. Max, did you cause the inaction? Is AWARE to blame?

anonymous - November 13th, 2005
Wow !!

The above is a bit,"gloves off" but quite thought provoking.

anonymous - November 13th, 2005
Well said Stuart. I couldn't agree more. Ken is very supportive of Rainbow. That is very clear.
LJ

anonymous - November 14th, 2005
You said it Stuart - 'years of dogged dtermination on environmental issues' and still no employee housing. Rainbow is not going ahead as planned because of the additional $800,000 that the developers have been asked to pay as of the last council meeting. Three years later and and yet another stumbling block. The cost of this affordable housing continues to increase as each month and year rolls along. If the developers must pay another $800,00 they must pass this cost onto the employees. Who will be able to afford this employee housing when it comes to market?

anonymous - November 14th, 2005
Boo hoo, where's my free lakefront home? Get a grip Whistler. You're dealing with subsidies and their unintended consequences. Do you ever think the WHA waiting list is going to be satisfied? Whistler has NEVER been cheap and it has always been a resort. Anyone with a shovel and a bag of salt can start a good business for themselves but they'd rather be skiing. This communities problems aren't complex. Lazy residents outnumber hard working ones.

anonymous - November 15th, 2005
Nice try, last posting. I have three jobs and live in a 550 sq.ft apartment with one other person. I've been here 8 years and I've never asked for anything. Without us working stiffs you wouldn't be able to get your latte in the morning. Perhaps you should rephrase your statement to say "rich residents outnumber poor ones". Then it would be believable. Get a grip on reality.

anonymous - November 15th, 2005
Darwin hard at work?

anonymous - November 15th, 2005
I find it amazing that the permanent residents in Whistler are divisive re: privileged vs. not privileged. When will people see the light and accept that we are in this together, that we actually share a similar backbone. We have all gone through the service industry and worked our buns off to live here. The difference is, some of has have made different choices which have shaped or unshaped our present circumstances. Ken owns a house, but look what he had to do to get to that point. Some of you speak as though we just walked into town and bought a house. I never have money in the bank and I've been in the black for many years. This is the choice I've made. When I sell, any profit will go to unpaid municipal taxes and debts incurred while living here. For the first time, in 20 years, I have seen a glimmer of hope if Ken gets elected. Maybe I won't have to sell my house. Maybe my kids can be part of the next generation. Anyone who thinks that permanent residents are rich---just go and spend a day or two with the families in any of our elementary schools or daycares. They are families of frontline tourism, they are families of Philippine nannies and homemakers, they are families of teachers and small business, they are not rich by any means. Of all the mayoral candidates, Ken understands this because he's been through it and is still going through it.

anonymous - November 15th, 2005
Here here! I had to leave because I just could simply no longer afford to stay. Only ONE of my friends from previous years (1991-2000) still lives in Whistler and that's because she was lucky enough to get on the infamous list. Sad for Whistler to have lost so much of it's mojo to poor planning.

anonymous - November 15th, 2005
I was impressed at ken's willingness to step out of the box at the Arts council forum and sing. It showed he was confident and that he could read a crowd.

In my mind he was much better than some of the other mayoralty candidate’s drivelling through their prepared monologue. And don’t get me wrong I am not so naïve to think that Ken didn’t do this spur of the moment(although he mayhave) but if your going to talk to people in the arts TALK TO THEM NOT AT THEM WITH SOME PAT POLITICAL GIBBERISH!!

anonymous - November 16th, 2005
Great Job Ken went from a Ted vote to a Ken vote!!!

anonymous - November 16th, 2005
Great Job Ken went from a Ted vote to a Ken vote!!!

anonymous - November 16th, 2005
Great Job Ken went from a Ted vote to a Ken vote!!!

anonymous - November 16th, 2005
Ken has been impressive in his depth. Do doubt about that.

anonymous - November 16th, 2005
As Eckhard said, remember that the mayor has only one vote.

Don't forget to research the platforms of the council candidates and, once they're elected, keep at them with the important and not-so-important questions.

anonymous - November 16th, 2005
But can we trust Ken. KEN has proved himself as Mr. No for several years now. It is always easy to find the problems and very challenging to find the solutions. Looking at the past, Ken has excelled in finding the problems and not once has he found a solution. And now he is says he is a 'changed man'. Think again voters of Whistler. Nothing, repeat, NOTHING will happen if Ken is elected mayor. Ken has proved himself to 'ask the hard questions' but NEVER to find the solutions. We NEED solutions to move forward!!

anonymous - November 16th, 2005
It was obvious at the Mayoral debate that Ken was dresed in a 'Reuse-it suit - blue shirt, black sports jacket, brown pants with a pink and blue tie. Ken would be the laughing stock of the IOC or in Victoria at the provincial level representing Whistler in this garb. And dressed in a tie, he appeared as comfortable as a 'wolf in sheep's clothing'. Beware of the man trying to change his image!

anonymous - November 16th, 2005
Ken obviously has more class than you, blogger above. As if he would dress in anything that was not appropriate, for whatever function was deemed important.Ken is not trying to change his image, he is simply trying to adapt to the obvious neccesity of representing all of Whistler. And don't forget Ted, a sheepish man in wolf's clothing perhaps?

anonymous - November 16th, 2005
You're worried about the mayor being an embarrassment to visiting dignitaries because of his or her clothing?

Ted mocked NDP backbencher Jenny Kwan's Chinese language in the legislature. He was caught, then denied the whole thing. Fortunately everything was recorded on tape and he was forced to apologize. Is that the kind of person that we want to represent Whistler at an international level?

anonymous - November 16th, 2005
Did Ken Melamed try to organize a union within the ski patrol?

anonymous - November 16th, 2005
Come on - tell me that's not true!

Please don't post innuendo without more detail.

anonymous - November 17th, 2005
Peter Davidson, CUPE 2010 President supports Ken....

anonymous - November 17th, 2005
My,my my,is that you Horler? Watts? Wade? You must be getting very very nervous. Can't say I blame you after seeing the performance of Ted at all three meetings. Ken could have just sat there and still would have outperformed. Vote for Ken. Vote for the honest politician.

anonymous - November 17th, 2005
Honest perhaps - but unsophisticated.

anonymous - November 17th, 2005
Someone posted a blog that said "Vote for the candidate who you'd most like to have a beer with". Its true that Ted, Ken, Nick, and Kristi would probably all make ok mayors. So I'm going to go with personality. Right now Ken and Nick are the two I'd most like to have a conversation with over a beer.

anonymous - November 17th, 2005
Define sophistication ?....someone who articulates well, speaks from their heart and listens to the communities needs./...what else ? What defines sophistication in the political arena today? It is all over the map, but when someone steps up to the plate with a solid and consisitent history...that is sophistication. I am proud of Ken and he will represent Whistler well no matter who he is speaking with - IOC or hometown folk....honesty gives one a clear mind. CW

anonymous - November 17th, 2005
The jungle beat seems to indicate that the only monkeys NOT voting for Ken are the land developers and real estate agents. Need anything more be said?

anonymous - November 17th, 2005
How about us monkeys who are involved in tourism? A lot of us see Ted as more tourist friendly than Ken. I'm still on the fence and would love to hear your thoughts... For example I'm all for the Pique to Pique which I undertand Ken is dead against- we he oppose other tourist friendly ideas? (like an airport)

anonymous - November 17th, 2005
Heather Clifford
I'm not voting for Ken...But it has nothing to do with my job..as a real estate agent of 16 years...and I do not appreciate being referred to as a monkey. Thank you very much!

anonymous - November 17th, 2005
The likelihood of a peak to peak gondola drawing a significant number of tourists is slim. Sure, it's a nice gimmick, but it won't make up for poor snowfall, high prices, and poor accessibility.

Further, study after study has shown that more value can be obtained from eco-type tourism than it can from clearcutting an area and putting in a waterslide (as an example). I'm not saying that Whistler is undeveloped, but we do have a wilderness in our backyards that people are willing to pay to visit. If we keep building new hotels and other gimmicks in hopes that people will visit, instead of marketing what's here already, Whistler is going to suffer greatly.

Putting the brakes on development is not a bad thing. Look at Banff as an example. Would you rather ski in a relatively rugged and pristine mountain area, or Disneyland North? Ferris wheels and shiny hotels are not the answer.

Ken is in favour of doing what's best for Whistler as a community, not doing what's best for the shareholders of whatever corporation contributed to his mayoral campaign or to his provincial government.

anonymous - November 17th, 2005
We live, and choose to live in a resort...We need tourists, not at any expense but to survive. Its simple, sometimes you can go too far in one direction...Left.

anonymous - November 17th, 2005
Only one thing will boost the skier visits..............SNOW.

anonymous - November 18th, 2005
Can someone tell me what Ken or Ted's veiwpoint regarding the Peak to Peak tram had to do with being a mayor? The mayor has no more power to direct the decsions made in the Intrawest corporate board room than he/she has dictating the price of hotel rooms. Which, by the way, seems to me to be a big part of the problem regarding the declining number of tourist visits.

anonymous - November 18th, 2005
It's true, you can go too far in any direction. Look what's happened to Whistler as a result of its rampant development - a whole bunch of empty hotel rooms. If they didn't build the things in the first place, nobody would be complaining (except the builders and developers, who made a bunch of money constructing and selling off the units).

Now we have to build more in hopes that new condos or a big gondola will bring in more visitors? The only thing that will happen if we do that is the same thing that happened before - tradespeople and developers make some money, but the place will become even more overbuilt.

There are only a limited number of people who ski, and a limited number of people who will come to Whistler to ski. There are more resorts competing for a static number of tourists, so we can't expect to keep growing and growing ad infinitum.

It's time to take a breather and reassess things.

anonymous - November 18th, 2005
There are actually quite a few realtors who are supprting Ken. Some have publically announced it (see names on ad). To paraphrase Alex H., I think that a many "fence-sitters" will ultimately vote for Ken simply because they know in their hearts that he will be honest and that at the end of the day, he will ALWAYS look out for the best interests of Whistler in general. And for those who continuously harp on how far left he is and will therefore scare away tourists , spare me. Who has been his primary employer for the last , what 15 years? Ken is VERY well aware of the need for tourists and everything that will attract them , they are HIS bread and butter too.

anonymous - November 18th, 2005
One more reason not to vote for Ted:

Bill 75: Streamlining or steamrolling

Local lawmakers decry proposed legislation as provincial power grab
By David Burke
Reporter

Local officials’ authority to control major developments within their jurisdictions could be “steamrolled” if a bill currently working its way through B.C.’s legislature becomes law, one local activist said last week. Whistler’s mayor, meanwhile, predicted a “huge backlash” from municipal and regional lawmakers if the provisions of the bill, ominously called the Significant Projects Streamlining Act, are used to override local planning and approval authority.

Bill 75, introduced last week in the legislature by Kevin Falcon, B.C.’s Minister of State for Deregulation, “will create a competitive climate for business and investment here in British Columbia,” Falcon said in the legislature last Thursday. “It will reduce red tape and regulation and streamline processes for both government and business.”

The act would allow the government to assign special status to projects “deemed to be significant and that will positively benefit the economic, environmental and social well-being of British Columbia,” Falcon said.

Under the bill, if the provincial Cabinet believes such a project would be subject to inefficient or prolonged approval processes, it may designated as provincially significant. A minister will then be assigned to oversee the approval process for the project — fast-tracking it through the various levels of decision-making required.

“Once the project is designated, approval authorities will be required to take all reasonable actions to move through the complex decision-making process faster and more efficiently,” Falcon said.

For example, under the legislation such projects could see different ministries review such projects simultaneously, he said.

Local MLA Ted Nebbeling defended the bill, saying it merely helps the government reduce the amount of red tape when a project comes up for approval.

As an example, he cited the Callaghan Valley, where a number of venues related to the 2010 Winter Olympics are planned.

“With the Callaghan, there is forestry impact, First Nations impact, environmental impact, and all these various agencies have to be involved in the approval of that project,” Nebbeling said.

“Because it’s in the SLRD (Squamish-Lillooet Regional District), you deal with the regi onal district as well. You get an enormous amount of benefit by coordinating (the approval process) as one strategy. Declaring it a significant project would force all these groups to come to the table and find ways to bring it to completion.”

But the bill is meeting with vocal and, it appears, widespread opposition.

Eckhard Zeidler, a board member with the Association of Whistler Area Residents for the Environment (AWARE), said that as written, the bill would give Cabinet and individual ministers sweeping new powers.

“What’s really scary about it is it trumps local government authority,” Zeidler said. “I don’t see anything barring them from putting a nuclear reactor in the RMOW if they see fit, over the wishes of local residents.

“We stand to get the surprise of our lives in Whistler if the Olympics is one of the things that they have in mind for this, because we could see things happening within our municipal boundaries that people don’t particularly want.

“This is just the latest in a gr eat wave of things in this direction that are coming out of Victoria. If it’s passed, it’ll be just one of many things that local planners have to deal with. If Victoria wants to do something that doesn’t fit with what they’re doing, then our local planners will just be streamrolled.”

At Monday’s SLRD meeting, Susan Gimse, SLRD Area C director and a member of the Union of British Columbia Municipalities (UBCM) board, called Bill 75 anti-democratic.

A motion from Gimse opposing the proposed legislation passed by an 8-1 vote, with only Lillooet Mayor Greg Kamenka voting in opposition.

“This legislation, to me, completely ignores the public’s views and that, to me, is wrong,” Gimse said.

“We agree that, at times, there may be a need for streamlining legislation that can move things forward,” she added, “but we don’t agree with legislation tahat overrides democracy and we don’t think local governments should be included as one of the potential constraints.”

Zeidler compared the bill to le gislation already in place in Alberta. There, large projects may receive pre-approval from a body such as the Natural Resources Conservation Board. Under Section 619 of Alberta’s Municipal Government Act, those pre-approvals take precedence over local planning authority.

In Canmore, Alta., the power of local residents to affect the details of the huge Three Sisters residential and resort project has been limited for many years because of that legislation.

“They ended with all this development that wasn’t part of their plan and there was nothing they could do about it,” Zeidler said.

Mayor Hugh O’Reilly on Friday said that if the Province were to try to fast-track projects without proper review using Bill 75, local citizens and officials would likely be quite upset.

“I would have to think you would have do that with the utmost of caution. I wouldn’t think you could do that (override local authority) without a huge backlash,” he said.

“We’ve been fairly good about negotiating, giving where we could, but standing our ground when we had to. We’ve built a billion-dollar economic engine here. It’s a fragile engine and if it’s not treated very carefully it could be damaged, significantly.”

Nebbeling said the Province isn’t trying to override local authority. It’s merely trying to ensure that important projects don’t get bogged down in bureaucracy.

“When a project comes forward, people have to deal with one level of bureaucracy, and another level, and another level,” he said. “Dealing with them all in one swoop is definitely a big step forward.”

NDP leader Joy McPhail noted that a few months ago, Nebbeling — who is Minister of State for Community Charter — brought forward a new Community Charter, which spells out the relationship between the Province and local governments.

McPhail said Bill 75 takes back much of the power granted to municipalities in the charter.

“Greater independence? Empowering? Greater autonomy? Planning and revenue tools?” McPhail said in the legislature last Thursday. “The Minister of State for Community Charter must be wondering what the heck he’s been doing for the last two years. Bill 75 overrides the Community Charter. It’s paramount.

“This legislation… shows just how sincere this government is about empowering local governments.”

whistler - November 18th, 2005
Note: Please try not to double post (you too Stuart) it makes reading everything a lot harder to follow and wastes everyones time. Keep it on the topic, post once and that's it. thanks, Duane

anonymous - November 18th, 2005
Election is an opportunity

By Alan Forsythe, reporter, Whistler Question, Nov 17


Would a Melamed-run council be open to all options and ideas? CAN HE TRULY FIND A COMPROMISE BETWEEN THE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES HE BELIEVES IN SO STRONGLY AND THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY?

OR WILL HE LOOK AT PROPOSALS, FORM A COMMITTEE, STUDY, IT, ANALYZE IT, REVIEW IT AND THEN SAY NO?

The people who live and work in this valley are desperate for strong leadership at municipal hall, now more than ever. With the high growth days of the 1980s and ’90s behind us, it will take strong municipal leadership to keep Whistler a viable mountain resort — not just a haven for the wealthy few, who could afford the myriad of covenants and regulations a Melamed-led Council would place on builders and business owners; but one that would welcome those who wish to live here full time and allow them to help build the community.
We need affordable housing, not promises that when affordable housing does get built it will be the most environmentally friendly housing ever. We need to encourage small business and get locals back into the Village, not promises that Council will support business as long as business owners jump through this hoop and another 12 before being considered “appropriate.”
We need to work with the Province to get a greater share of the hotel tax, and with VANOC to make sure Whistler makes the most of marketing opportunities leading up to the Olympics.

anonymous - November 18th, 2005
The measure of three years - Pique Newsmagazine - Nov 17

By Bob Barnett

If there’s a message from the last three years it’s that we haven’t come as far as we should have in that time. And why is that? For my money, it’s because collectively we’ve been too complacent; the circle of engagement has become too small; we’ve been too certain that others are responsible for our problems.

On Saturday my vote will be for people who will challenge the status quo. People who won’t tell you, "Trust us".

anonymous - November 18th, 2005
The greatest thing about Ken is that you CAN trust him. If he says he will work to represent the diverse groups within the community, he will. He doesn't lie, period. He's a critical thinker and more principled individual does not exist among the mayoral candidates.

anonymous - November 18th, 2005
The blog regarding business owners having to "jump through hoops" seems to imply that businesses, local or otherwise, should be given carte blanche to do whatever they want to in pursuit of a dollar. Is that what you're suggesting? Because I'd rather vote for a representative who will make sure the needs of the community are met, not just the needs of some business owners. Whistler is a unique town; what flies in Vancouver doesn't necessarily fly here.

I'm on the WHA list, and I'd rather wait for a few more months for an "environmentally friendly" house (ie one that requires minimal outside energy and one that uses up to date technology) than have the dubious benefit of owning a slap-dash quick fix.

anonymous - November 18th, 2005
Oh! Not to worry you will wait more than a few months and you will pay many more dollars to get your tiny little accommodation as the potential developers of Rainbow have now been asked to pay another $800,000 - not an insignificant amount of money that must of course be passed onto the WHA purchasers list. And I am sure this is not the last of the 'hoops' that Ken and his group of naysayers will demand. And Ken's council would be demanding yet another study, review, committee formed to propone the decision so that the cost will continue to rise. For every month delayed your cost esclates. Young people in Whistler are not living the dream, they are leaving the dream.

anonymous - November 18th, 2005
Ken voted no to the Function Housing, Yes to delay Rainbow, No to Nesters Pond Housing (the largest rental housing project in Whistler. Seppos Way) and No to the Spring Creek townhouses . We can trust Ken.... to Vote No. Look at the Athletes Village Project. Two years have passed and we are still studying the site, and putting up the costs. It will likely be over $300 a square foot, and have no parking. There is a January deadline, and no decisions have been made. Do you really think Ken will change 180 degrees?

anonymous - November 18th, 2005
Plenty of people are willing to pay more for green housing, and for housing that doesn't compromise our local environment. Sometimes you have to wait a little longer for something good. Obviously some people have more integrity than others. Those who are that desperate to own a little condo can vote for someone who will help to steamroll any and all developments.

Should we just pave the entire Sea-to-Sky Corridor, put up some big-box stores and highrise slums so all these poor homeless families in Whistler will be happy?

anonymous - November 18th, 2005
Or we could just build Rainbow, rather than delay it.

anonymous - November 18th, 2005
I'm not sure that Ken is as negative as that. He said No to the Olympic BID as it stood (for very good reason- we have yet to see any financial tools etc...as the bid was not a solid deal as it stood and he simply wanted to wait until we got the best deal)and never ever said NO to the Olympics themselves. I would argue that his saying no to some things are for similar "underlying" reasons. He does not say no because he is a negative guy, rather,he wants the best for all of us.

anonymous - November 18th, 2005
During my 25 years here I have seen a lot of mayors, all of them have had their good and bad points. However the one that stick in my mind were the ones that had a vision and inspired me to believe that there was a way for me to particpate in that vision. A kind of 'let's make it happen " attitude.
Unfortunatey over the last couple of administrations we have moved away from making decisions to analyzing whether we should make a decison at all. Rather than say yes we say no or defer to a committee on the logic that by doing so we will get the best deal for the community or we will be able to control the outcome.
Maybe.
However time goes by and opportunites are missed and things end up costing more.
We are at a critical time in our history and changes in our approach and in our business and politcal models are needed to move forward successfully in to a mature, non-growth, but sustainable diversified economy. The next mayor needs to be an agent of change. Someone who can inspire and create the vehicles for us to have the courage to make changes that may be uncomfortable or risky. It is the easy route to say no and say you are looking out the for community and continue to promote the status quo. Our past mayor has stated that there is nothing fundamentally wrong with Whistler. If so why so much turmoil?

Is Ken an agent of change? his election rhetoric would suggest that he wants to be. His history and comments("I'm basically a Luddite" suggest that he is not comfortable with change and is about protecting and preserving not changing and possibly improving. He says he wants to improve the economy. Good, who is he resourcing for his plan(is there a plan or is it just a feel good statement)? entrepeneurs, investors, businesspeople?(the yes guys) or planners and consultants and political associates(the no guys). Ken uses his "no's to grind better deals for this community or so he would have us believe. Perhaps it gives a perception of a level of control that he feels is neccessry. All i know is that it slows everything down and ends up costing taxpayers more money every time
I don't think he understands that leadership is about having the courage to say yes to embrace new ideas and build new opportunites. We need to open doors to new ideas, create a framework so that they can flourish and then get out of the and see what happens. It's scary but it works, it's how this place was built in the first place. But it takes some courage to say yes and trust the process.
No's are safe place to go, there is no risk and you can control what happens but it will be the lack of saying "yes let's do it' that will ultimatley determine the success of our future.

Ken, to date, has not demonstrated to me that he possesses the leadership skills to inspire,embrace, or to take risks that will benefit all members of the community.
Perhaps no mayor can or will but wouldn't it be nice if there was one.
Pat Kelly

anonymous - November 18th, 2005
Everytime Ken opens his mouth and speaks, he continues to impress me with his intelligence. I know he is honest and is running for all the right reasons, that alone should get him elected. Honest and smart, we should count ourselves lucky we have a candidate like Ken to vote as our Mayor.

anonymous - November 19th, 2005
Pat Kelly,

I greatly appreciate your comments and review on the situation in Whistler. Your words were brilliant! Let's hope that we will be celebrating Ted as mayor within the next 12 hours.

anonymous - November 19th, 2005
GO KEN GO!!! YOU will be our next Mayor

anonymous - November 19th, 2005
For Mayor, I'm uneasy about the divisiveness and the un-spoken intentions of both of the 'front runners'. I'll be voting for Kristi Wells to lead our new council team forward. For the fourteen years that I've followed her career, she has consistently overcome the derogatory stereotypes and exceeded most people's expectations, all with a professional composure that Whistler can be proud of. Kristi may appear to be 'a rose' amongst a bush of thorns, but she is just as skilled and capable as the matador in a ring of bulls.

Chris Manuel,
Whistler since '89

anonymous - November 19th, 2005
Perhaps my comments are being misunderstood. I on't believe Mr Nebbling offers the leadership qualites i talked about either. He is orientated towards a free market approach which I am predisposed to.
This election IMO is not about leadership, and vision and action as the canditate have not shown much of that. It's about who we believe understands our collective vision the best and can execute it.
Change is inevitable and must be adapted to to survive both in life and economically. Whistler has changed and will continue to change becuase it must to stay at the top. Yesterdays vision and policies are no longer relevant. In the final analysis I support the person who can execute and can act with confidence in a changing world.

anonymous - November 19th, 2005
I will admit that I was definitely leaning in the direction of Ted until Thursday's Pique came out. I had a good impression of his abilities during his previous mayoral term, and I thought he would be better at representing Whistler to the World than Ken would (although previous comments on Ken's attire are ridiculous & out of place - how many real Whistlerites own fancy suits?).

However, then came Ted's AD. "Ken's Voting Record". I decided that the kind of person who would place an ad like that is far away from the type of person I want to see representing Whistler to the world (Kristi, that goes for you too). I would much rather have the world see us as a tree-hugging, bike-riding, slightly rumpled looking honest people rather than slick, expensively attired, say-whatever-we-need-to-say-to-get-what-we-want snake oil salesmen.

Although I may not always agree with him, Ken is who we are. People complain about how negative he can be...but take a look at the 100+ posts above & count how many are positive. Apparently we aren't all sunshine & lollipops ourselves.

Stacy

whistler - November 20th, 2005
Congrats Ken!

anonymous - November 20th, 2005
Right on Kenny (oops...Mr.Mayor).

anonymous - November 20th, 2005
congrats ken.

a professional campaign indeed.


stacy kohut

anonymous - November 21st, 2005
I can breath again... thanks to the incredible town voting with their hearts and well informed minds. Ted's style doesn't work here. THANK GOD! Ken is the best and he put forward the most professional campaign with intelligence, knowledge, hope and integrity. I look forward to being a part of the next three years with you as our leader. Thanks KEN!!!!!

anonymous - November 21st, 2005
From an outsider looking in, this certainly has been an interesting race to watch. I have been following the Whistler election because your community has been pitted by concerns for survival due to the loss in tourism. By the time the 19th arrived I felt certain that Ken would be elected as Mayor in Whistler(although one can never tell for sure). Your blogs and other articles in the local papers gave strong evidence of that. The Whistler that Ted Nebbling reflected in his campaign was still rooted in 1996. His vision of Whistler remained entrenched in the dated frenzy of building a Los Vegas style tourist destination that had long since lost it's charm. No one wants that sort of destination any more. Thank goodness for Ken Melamed who stayed true to his vision, environmental roots and love for a community he has lived in for many many years. As someone who remembers the Whistler of old and has avoided spending one penny there in years,I am delighted with the results the people of Whistler have made. Well done. I look forward to the new directions this new Mayor and Council will take with the guidance from you all, the folks who put him in his seat. People around the world see Canada and in particular British Columbia as a destination unlike anywhere else. Why...because of it's amazing beauty and the opportunities to venture into the natural world that we still have access to. I can recall skiing in Norway in 1977 when a local skier disclosed that of all the places in the world he would love ski at it would be Whistler. He said that it was because it had the best advance ski terrain and was relatively undamaged by tourism....could he still say that today. Congratulations on all of your votes and to the dedicated people of Whistler who put so much heart into supporting Ken. I look forward to making the trip back to your "community". It has gotten it's heart back. I feel more confident in 2010 with Ken at the helm. Thank you.

Randi
Vancouver