Tuesday 7 February 2012

The BC Place giant screens debacle: City asks PavCo to do what it said it would do

The following story is from the personal blog of Vancouver City Councillor and citizen’s rights champion Geoff Meggs, who has officially and as a matter of public record exposed BC PavCo’s wilful disregard for due process in the BC Place giant screens debacle.  On his blog, the Councillor states “When Vancouver city council voted unanimously to demand an action plan from the BC Pavilion Corporation to bring its new digital signs into compliance with city policies, the city was simply asking PavCo to do what it has always said it would do.”

Councillor Meggs then goes on to produce documents showing how in a September 2008 ‘Upgrade Commitment Agreement’, PavCo specifically promised in writing to follow the City’s wishes concerning these matters and “not to fetter council discretion regarding False Creek North Official Development Plan Amendments or otherwise”. (Please see document image below.)

This damaging document serves as yet further proof in support of the massive outcry to Provincial Ministry officials to have the rogue PavCo organisation reined in and ordered to follow the due process always followed by Crown Corporations: that is, to submit three standard sign permit applications for the three outdoor screens to the City’s Centre for Billboard Permitting for standard scrutiny under the existing Sign Bylaw provisions applicable to all entertainment districts in our city.  − Is anyone else wondering where the PavCo Ministry is during all this? (i.e. The Ministry of JTI)

(Please click on the following link for Geoff Meggs’ blog)  http://www.geoffmeggs.ca/2012/01/18/the-bc-place-sign-debate-city-asks-pavco-to-do-what-it-said-it-would-do/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-bc-place-sign-debate-city-asks-pavco-to-do-what-it-said-it-would-do 

(Please click on the following image to view the ‘Upgrade Commitment Agreement’ where PavCo specifically promises to follow the City’s wishes concerning these matters. See item #3.)