XPost: bc.politics, vic.general, van.general   
      
   Like his corrupt leader, Gordon Campbell, this guy feels he's fully suitable   
   and worthy of   
   holding a cabinet position in this government.   
   This journalist nails why he should be gone permanently.   
   __________________________________________________________   
      
   Les Leyne: If John Les walks, so should bureaucrat   
      
      
   By Les Leyne, Times Colonist -June 26, 2010   
      
      
   It's outrageous that a former Chilliwack bureaucrat has to face criminal   
   breach of trust   
   charges for doing exactly what his mayor and council encouraged and subtly   
   guided him to   
   do.   
      
   Former Chilliwack mayor John Les was cleared yesterday of wrongdoing arising   
   from a   
   four-year investigation of suspicious rezonings and agricultural land   
   exclusions.   
      
   Fair enough. If police have spent four years investigating and a special   
   prosecutor has   
   spent three years poring over evidence, the conclusion can be accepted.   
      
   But if Les walks away in the clear, then so should the municipal staff member   
   whose job   
   was to execute the will of the mayor and council. Instead, the special   
   prosecutor elected   
   to file three breach of trust charges against then-subdivision approving   
   officer Grant   
   Sanborn.   
      
   There are no allegations of bribery in the information provided. There are no   
   allegations   
   Sanborn's allegedly criminal decisions were made for money or personal gain.   
      
   The prosecutor's outline says that Sanborn made the decisions based on the   
   "pro-development, can-do" culture established in Chilliwack over the years   
   that Les was   
   mayor. Les went on to provincial politics and was in cabinet when this case   
   surfaced. He   
   properly resigned and has been waiting to be cleared for two years.   
      
   Sanborn was following the prevailing ethos in Chilliwack at the time, doing   
   what he was   
   encouraged to do by a firm-handed mayor who was responsible for establishing   
   the   
   municipality's enthusiastic attitude toward growth and development.   
      
   But the ex-mayor gets cleared and the ex-bureaucrat gets booked. It's not   
   right.   
      
   The police checked 80 development approvals and found a number of mistakes or   
   errors in   
   judgment that contravened plans, bylaws or rules. A lot of them alienated   
   farmland for   
   non-farm uses, such as subdivisions.   
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^   
      
   Les's mayoralty was all about growth. The evidence shows Les and most of his   
   council   
   "embraced this pro-development philosophy such that staff were encouraged,   
   both directly   
   and subtly, to adhere to what was described as an attitude of innovation and   
   creativity,"   
   particularly in processing development applications.   
      
   Staff were encouraged to consider regulations and bylaws "as guidelines only,   
   with a goal   
   of finding creative ways to make development opportunities happen," the   
   prosecutor found.   
      
   Sanborn is charged in connection with two specific approvals. One was for a   
   housing   
   project for which Les was the developer and main proponent. The mayor had a   
   numbered   
   company that did a sophisticated, multi-step rezoning.   
      
   The prosecutor accuses Sanborn of giving Les preferential treatment in the   
   approval   
   process. But he found a paucity of evidence that Les asked for it. Les   
   declared his   
   conflict of interest at council meetings and recused himself when his project   
   came up.   
      
   Sanborn is essentially being charged with breach of trust for giving his boss   
   the benefit   
   of the doubt and not being independent enough as approving officer.   
      
   He's also charged over another approval because he didn't check compliance   
   with flood   
   plain restrictions. That might be a botch of his responsibilities. But it sure   
   doesn't   
   sound like breach of trust, given that he was operating on an "open for   
   business" premise   
   that was explicitly set by the mayor and council.   
      
   The exact specification in the breach of trust charges is that he "used his   
   public office   
   for a purpose other than the public good."   
      
   That purpose may have been against the public good. But the mayor and council   
   set the   
   purpose.   
      
   They went out of their way to encourage growth and development. They encouraged   
   "creativity" by staff when it came to applying rules. They encouraged everyone   
   to view   
   regulations and bylaws just as "guidelines." They presided over a multitude of   
   mistakes   
   and errors in judgment.   
      
   But when authorities take a close look at two decisions made during that era,   
   one of them   
   about a development the mayor himself was fronting, they exonerate the mayor   
   and throw the   
   book at the bureaucrat.   
      
   Sanborn has other legal problems to do with his subsequent career as a   
   development   
   consultant. And an earlier report by the Agricultural Land Commission also   
   rapped him for   
   the way development approvals were handled under his watch.   
      
   But the special prosecutor's report goes a long way to explaining those calls.   
   Every   
   bureaucrat should read the special prosecutor's report on Les. It's an example   
   of how   
   blame follows the law of gravity.   
      
   It flows down in a hierarchy, not up.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)