Activists get gritty in protest over Gateway Program
Some of the sand put in place to stabilize the ground for the planned $1-billion South Fraser Perimeter Road—part of the Gateway Program—will soon be headed straight for B.C. transportation minister Shirley Bond.
Long-time Surrey resident Bernadette Keenan, a founding member of the Bridgeview Community Action Group, told the Georgia Straight that she and other local activists are behind a campaign they’re calling Sand for Shirley. Keenan said she has already collected recycled envelopes, and now she’s getting people who are concerned about the construction of the SFPR to sign a form and scoop sand into an envelope for Bond. The envelopes will be hand-delivered rather than mailed, Keenan added.
“Why sand? It is a symbol,” she said by phone. “They’re dumping it on us. It’s in our faces, and you can’t drive anywhere around our neighbourhood without seeing it. There used to be trees growing there. There were plants and houses, and people that I know and respected are gone now because of that sand. Basically, I hate it.”
At a July 19 meeting at Bridgeview Hall, Surrey resident Tom Jaugelis of Gatewaysucks.org told the Straight the envelopes will be filled at various events this summer and fall. He confirmed that someone will drop the envelopes off for Bond at either her constituency office in Prince George or her office in Victoria. He said he believes there is still time to stop the project.
“She is kind of removed from it, whereas [former transportation minister Kevin] Falcon was right here in the area,” Jaugelis said. “And she has given the impression that she may not be that familiar with it, because she has referred to it in the media as the ”˜Simon Fraser Perimeter Road’. We think sending her sand that’s been dumped on these neighbourhoods will give her a perfect taste for what this project will be like, and maybe she will become more familiar with it.”
Bond did not return a call from the Straight by deadline.
At the meeting, Jaugelis and Keenan were joined by Delta residents Inger Kam, Wilma Haig, and Susan Hodges from the South Fraser Action Network, as well as Ernie Baatz and Richelle Giberson from the Sunbury Neighbourhood Association—all from communities affected by the SFPR. Keenan and Giberson demonstrated how to fill an envelope and sign the form being sent to Bond, which states: “We have had more than enough preload sand, so I am sending some back to you. Please remove the rest and cancel the Gateway Program’s freeway network.”
Surrey activist Tom Jaugelis believes the South Fraser Perimeter Road should not be built.
NDP transportation critic and Surrey resident Harry Bains told the Straight by phone, “Good for them for raising the concerns of the community.”
Bains said he did not believe that many components of the $3-billion Gateway Program could still be stopped, but he said that if he were transportation minister, he would have consulted more widely with the residents of communities affected by the South Fraser Perimeter Road.
“I may not stuff the envelope myself and send it to the minister, but I do understand why they are doing it, and I fully understand their position,” Bains added.
Jaugelis said the delivery of the sand will coincide with the upcoming Global Work Party worldwide event on October 10, for which he is helping organize a local event that opposes the SFPR, called Dig in for Climate Justice. Last fall, local activists took part in the Bridge to a Cool Planet event to raise awareness about climate change as part of the International Climate Day of Action. Dig in for Climate Justice will come under the umbrella of the international movement 350.org and will be cohosted by the Council of Canadians and Gatewaysucks.org. Keenan and her colleagues have already announced that they will meet that day at 2 p.m. at Bridgeview elementary school.




Follow us on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Comments
Also like to point out with all the funding cutbacks to essential programs like education and health care, a huge part of the "Sand for Shirley" Campaign is to give people the opportunity to say where they would rather invest the billions of dollars being wasted on freeways that will only increase congestion rather than relieve it. Each form includes a fill in the blank statement " I want the government to invest in _________________________________not Freeways" From the response so far people definitely do not agree with the Liberal government's view that pavement not people is the priority for spending our tax dollars on.
If you want to get involved in the campaign or learn more go to
www.sandforshirley.ca
or if you just want to help get the message to Shirley Bond there is an on-line petition at
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/sand-for-shirley
For every signature we commit to sending Shirley a scoop of sand.
BernadetteK
We've revised the article so it refers to you as a founding member of the Bridgeview Community Action Group.
The most common recipe for stopping freeways is spirited public opposition combined with a financial squeeze. Sounds like the situation we have here again. See http://www.livableregion.ca/blog/blogs/index.php/2010/01/17/south_fraser...
How many schools will Shirley and Gordon be willing to shut down so they can trash the banks of the Fraser River with their $2 billion waterfront freeway?
all the work to this point is preparatory in an attempt to make this risky project more attractive to potential builders.
There are alternative options, like rail, opening the port to trucks 24/7 instead of just day time Monday to Friday that were suggested and would have saved the tax payers money and would have prevented many of the cutbacks to education, seniors, housing, and health care.
Developers and and corporations are behind this project, so don't kid yourself that the road is needed. Prime farmland is taken out of the ALR, what about our food security? Developers buy up the now useless farmland very cheap and develop it into industrial for profit. Wetlands, streams and creeks are being destroyed with no thought to the environment.
There is so much more to this issue than just a highway that is not needed.
BOG LAND not freeways. Farms not freeways. Health care and education... NOT freeways!
Who, in their conscious mind can live with the oil spill gushing, killing billions of lives? It is time to pull our policies and development projects into line with our values... oil-based development is NOT OKAY. We need to work towards less violent transportation solutions.
Sign the petition if you care about the Fraser Valley watershed and airshed, and about the health of humans an other species too. Either we are a part of the solution or...
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/sand-for-shirley
Gateway is just a tool to spread development through Delta into Surrey; a mere ruse to get land out of the ALR.
And the sooner we can run the highway straight into downtown Vancouver, the better!
mayor watts has been working hard to sell surrey as a great place to live and invest with sfu, the new city hall, new library, designed quite beautifully .
i believe that the best of architects could not design anyhing as beautiful as nature itself. we are talking water front property here. most cities
living near rivers, lakes, oceans, wish to beautify the area. we live a few minutes from the fraser river with its sandy beaches and it should be used for relaxation and recreation for the public. gateway will ruin this,
causing even more pollution for surrey and our neighbours, abbotsford and chilliwack, in the fraser valley. this is so disgusting and it must be stopped.
How many schools will Shirley and Gordon be willing to shut down so they can trash the banks of the Fraser River with their $2 billion waterfront freeway?
==============================
Eric, should I take this to mean that you are normally on a first name basis with the Premier of BC and the Minister of Education? Do they call you Eric? Really, I would like to know, because in my mind it would help to explain a lot of things.
Rod Smelser
I believe there's a lot more to this than meets the eye. I think the opposition to the BC Government's highways plans has been conducted in such an emotive and absolutist fashion, incredibly opposing ALL highway development, as to make it quite impossible for middle of the road, swing voters to take any of their critiques seriously. When it comes to design improvements, compensation improvements, and the like, this has played to the Liberal Government's hand beautifully.
Rod Smelser
I agree that there is a lot more to this than meets the eye. The opposition has worked very hard to present calm reasonable alternatives. They have been ignored. Greg Hoover and Olav Naas (www.thereisanotherway.com) came up with one alternative--it was never properly assessed. Shorthshipping was evaluated by PortMetro Vancouver--one third of the cargo can go this way. Improving current roads without destroying whole neighbourhoods was never assessed properly.
All governments have failed the "public trust" to do the right thing for the people. The Conservation Covenant on the Conservation area of Burns Bog has been ignored by the Federal, Provincial, MetroVancouver and the Corporation of Delta.
The Corporation of Delta kept saying that it could not invoke the Conservation Covenant without the permission of the Federal Government.
This theory got blown out of the water by Mayor Lois Jackson's threats to invoke it if MetroVancouver continued with its proposal to apply for Ramsar and UNESCO designation for the Conservation Area of Burns Bog.
The main question I am asked nowadays is, "why is the Mayor (Mayor Lois Jackson) opposed to Ramsar and UNESCO designation?"
That's a good question. I have my ideas. What are yours?
All four levels of the government promised to protect Burns Bog in 2004. Their collective failure to protect Burns Bog is a failure of the public trust that you and I elected them to uphold.
The UN published a paper in Dec. 2007 pointing out the fastest and cheapest way to reduce greenhouse gases is to IMMEDIATELY STOP THE DESTRUCTION OF PEATLANDS. So why are we using our hard earned tax dollars to destroy the only bog of its kind in the world--the bog so aptly named the "lungs of the lower mainland"?
I would like to know when you voted for this. And when did the rest of BC get to vote on this? Because I sure didn't get to vote on the Gateway project.
The only vote I got to take part in was a boondoggle anyway because the Liberals ran their campaign on hot air and fallacies. The reason only 40% of people vote nowadays is because we no longer have a true democracy and you can not trust the politicians.
In my opinion, the politicians you are supporting with your comment are the small group of fanatics who are sabatoging the democratic right of voters.
The comments are even better. I found Rod Smeiser's comments very difficult to rate--too many issues in one comment.
============================
I don't think your assessment that opposition to the Gateway suite of projects has been calm or reasonable is at all accurate. It's been a holy war against all highways of any kind, anywhere, any time. It's been totally irrational, and has responded to the needs of funders, most of whom do not live in the Fraser Valley or its delta.
One example will, I hope, suffice to illustrate what I am saying here. I don't have a handy link, but you may recall that several years ago the Vancouver CIty Council voted at Councillor Cadman's insistence to oppose the Port Mann-Hwy 1 project. Cadman was just delighted to say, again and again, that he got that resolution passed unanimously. He went on to tell the cameras that he and Vancouver Council had no problems with either of the two Perimeter roads, just Port Mann-Hwy 1. Essentially the same attitude has come from the Burnaby city hall.
When a group of people can tell you that they have no problem with a road that involves substantial losses of farmland and impinges on an environmental asset like Burns Bog, but they are unalterably oposed to a highway and bridge expansion that will occur within an existing transport ROW, it's as clear as anything can be that these people are NOT motivated by any kind of environmental concerns whatsoever. Instead, other considerations are involved, relating for the most part to real estate prices and municipal tax bases.
Rod Smelser