Saturday, October 3, 1992 @ ei: i PAGE = = = Op OurWiEWS AdrianRAESIDE Change for the better t’s official, the City of Castlegar [= be having a byelection after all. The last-minute entries of Dave Gairns and Renee Read gives this municipal byelection the steam it needs to peak the curiosity of our apathetic public. Gairns and Read join Doug Green as the three hopefuls vying to occupy the vacated council seat. The three candidates offer Castlegar enough variety to make the decision-making process an interesting one. On one hand, there is Green — a ‘hand-picked candidate carrying the banner for the Coalition Unaccepting Rash Bureaucracy. Surely, Green’s affiliation to CURB should give us an indication of how he feels our city is performing. With that in mind, Green wants change and he has every right to expect change from a community and council that has rested on its 1970s-like laurels for far too long. Elsewhere, Read also wants change. A relative newcomer to our city, the manger of the Castlegar and District Chamber of Commerce has visions that includes economic diversity and self-promotion. Bold words within a city that refuses to embrace its potential. Gairns, too, has a vision for Castlegar. The former. city administrator wants it to take its proper place in the West Kootenay, something he could accomplish at city hall. The candidates may have different styles, but their one common denominator is they want change. And any change would be a change for the better. my byelection file: you believe five minutes TWILBE A FOLLOWED BY ATERRIBIE WAILING GNASHING baba Castlegar is in Some odds and ends from one of those people but was sidelined by a little- known section Municipal Act. Thanks to two last- minute nominations (would race have liked to have been 4 in the = before the noon deadline?), Castlegar voters will decide on more than the new RCMP building when they go to the polls in this month’s municipal election. Former city administrator Dave Gairns and Renee Read, the Castlegar and District Chamber of Commerce manager, joined Ron NORMAN Comments from the Crossroads You see, Flux wanted to take on city hall at both the ballot box and in the courtroom. But the Municipal Affairs Ministry ruled him out of order. The Municipal states that anyone with a disputed account against a _ office within the B.C. Tel employee Doug Green in the chase for the single vacant seat on Castlegar council. Now we have a real election. And that’s how it should be. No one should get elected by acclamation — especially not after the turmoil we’ve seen around city hall of late. I’m only surprised that more people didn’t put their names forward. eee CURB vice-president Walter Flux would municipality. This little-known section of the Municipal Act isn’t just a piece of red tape designed by some Victoria bureaucrat to make life harder for would-be politicians. It’s there for a reason. And the reason is simple: someone disputing a bill with the city could conceivably get themselves elected to council and then sway the other council members to drop the dispute. please see NORMAN page 7 Street TALK Annie Tarasoff Pass Creek “No. I believe it’s a day of rest.” Bruce Lajeunesse Pass Creek “No. Major shopping should be done during the week.” Act = municipality can’t run for . a Question: Should stores in Castlegar be open for shopping on Sundays? ] d \ Ay. Pete Perverseff Matthew Zaitsoff Castlegar Pass Creek Lisa Baker Thrums “I think so. Some people don’t have time during the week.” “Yes. A lot of peop like shopping on weekends.” “If I owned a store no, but as a shopper I think it’s convenient.” Please address all letters to: Letters to the Editor Castlegar News P.O. Box 3007 Castlegar, B.C. V1N 3H4 or deliver them to 197 Columbia Ave. Letters should be typewritten, double-spaced and not loriger than 300 words. Letters MUST be signed and include the writer's first and last names, address and a telephone number at which the writer can be reached between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. The writer's name and city or town of residence only will be published. Only in exceptional cases will letters be published anonymously. Even in those cases, the name, address and phone number of the writer MUST be disclosed to the editor. The News reserves the right to edit letters for brevity, clarity, legality, grammar and taste. Letters toll E ED ITO ee A tiny minority of last year’s graduating class showed disrespect to authority around the time of the Graduation Dance. Punishment was duly meted out, the individuals involved were suspended and those going on to higher education had some scholarship money they had qualified for taken away. However, when the principal tried to stop the offending graduates from participating in their own grad ceremony, he failed to impose his will. The offending grads came to their ceremony, they found clear support from enough of the other kids and even some parents to give them confidence, and they participated. These kids must have shaken the principal to the core. Consider this: the entire next graduating class is being made to suffer the pain and shame that the principal could not inflict on the offending grads of last year. SHSS prinicpal punishing wrong students last year enough is a principal who has been promoted beyond his ability. The only thing he is teaching the kids now is that authority is something that can’t be respected. Last year’s events proved to him that his methods are unsound. ‘Why should we allow him to punish our children for somethng someone else’s children did in some other year?’ The 1992-93 Stanley Humphries Grad Dance has been cancelled. The principal did not consult parents, teachers, or the students. What is going on is clear. A principal who punishes the innocent of this year because he couldn’t punish the guilty of He knows that he can’t inspire real respect in his students because his leadership is based on fear. On the symbolic last day when his students are graduating and need fear him no longer, he is afraid to face them at a celebration. Therefore, there will be no celebration. Although the importance of the grad ceremony has become somewhat overblown, arbitrarily cancelling the heart of the event after what happened last year is vindictive. The principal responsible for this decision should be replaced. 1 He would not tolerate being punished for something some other principal did in some other year. He would not respect an authority that did that to him. Why should we allow him to punish our children for something someone else’s children did in some other year? David Lewis Crescent Valley Federal government toying with loyal gun collectors @ New federal legislation laws leave Canadian gun owners looking like common criminals All firearm owners must be made aware of new changes affecting legitimate gun ownership in Canada. These regulations were quietly passed by the federal cabinet in mid-July. Many of these provisions are now law as of Aug. 1. The penalty for violating these regulations is a maximum two to 10 years imprisonment depending on the particular offense. The storage of firearms and ammunition is now specified by law. However, what constitutes “safe storage” is very poorly defined as being in a locked container which may “not be readily broken into.” Ammunition and firearms must be stored in separate locked containers and restricted firearms must now be locked so as to make firing impossible. The classification of firearms into groups has been expanded upon. The most severely affected are those now totally prohibited. Owners must turn in these guns and will not receive any compensation for the loss of their firearms. The second group are firearms now declared as prohibited. You may retain ownership by registering the firearm and registering yourself as a “bona fide collector.” As a bona fide collector you can become subject to warrantless inspections of that portion of your home where the firearm is stored. Without warning your local police now have the authority to enter your home to check for any potential violations. The third group consists of over a hundred specific firearms which are now restricted. You must forfeit or register these firearms. They may no longer be used for hunting purposes. You may transport them only under a permit obtained from the police. They may be discharged only at a government approved range. Firearms affected by the above classifications include 22 rimfires, shotguns and centerfire rifles. Some magazines for many firearms are now classified as prohibited weapons. Simple possession of these magazines as of Jan. 1 will be considered a criminal offense. These regulations should ‘be obtained by all firearm owners. They are contained in a massive 300 plus page document available from your Member of Parliament. Desmond Keddie Vice President of the National Firearms Association, British Columbia Richmond Norman continued from page 7 It would be a clearcut case of conflict of interest. I’m not saying that would have happened with Flux, but that’s the reason he — or anyone else with a disputed account with the city — is ineligible for Castlegar council. If CURB is to maintain a pres- ence on the municipal political scene, I recommend it do some thorough housekeeping. For instance, CURB president Mike O’Connor told the local me- dia that the candidate it supports in the byelection “will maintain CURB’s policy of openness if he’s elected.” Great. I have just one problem: CURB itself isn’t open to public scrutiny. The quasi-political organization won't disclose its membership. Yet, it’s taking a very prominent role in our community — going so far as to run a candidate in the up- coming byelection. I, for one, would like to know who is behind this organization. Then there is the matter of the nomination meeting: it wasn’t open to the media. ‘ O’Connor was quoted as saying the decision was taken because: “a lot of people feel they can’t really speak what’s on their minds if the press is there recording every- thing. Granted, O’Connor himself has never been one to shy away from the media and said he can’t un- derstand why people are intimi- dated in the presence of the press. Still, doesn’t it strike you as a bit odd that a group calling for more openness won't disclose its membership lists and closes its doors to the media? Then there is the way CURB went about nominating Doug Green. According to published re- ports, the group agreed on Green after an executive meeting. I don’t want to seem like I’m on CURB’s case, but can you imagine any other political party doing that? To its credit, CURB has gone through a nomination process with its members present. It was only afterwards that it found out the candidate it had chosen isn’t eligible. But instead of calling another nomination meeting, a handful of people apparently sat down and decided on the candidate them- selves. I can’t imagine the New Demo- crat, Liberal, Conservative or So- cial Credit parties doing that. And it contrasts sharply with the way the Reform Party selected its can- didate for this riding. If CURB is intent on remaining a force in this community and is serious about its role in local poli- tics, then it needs to change the way it has been operating.