Vancouver Courier: Commissioners hear pros and cons of volleyball at Jericho Beach Park

By Sandra Thomas - Staff writer

December 2, 2001

Opponents of sand volleyball courts at Jericho Beach Park outnumbered determined beach volleyball players as the two sides squared off this week over the future of the park.

Almost 250 people jammed a public hearing Wednesday night to air their views on building a permanent 12-court sand volleyball facility, roughly three-quarters the size of a soccer field, near the old concrete wharf just east of the Jericho Sailing Centre. The large number of speakers forced the board, which is not expected to vote on the issue until Jan. 14, to extend the meeting to Thursday night.

Colin Metcalfe, president of the Vancouver Field Sports Federation, generated a barrage of boos and catcalls when he told board members that beach volleyball is "under attack." The heckling grew in volume as he compared opponents of the volleyball facility to a "hyperbolic neighbourhood of nattering, nabob NIMBYs," prompting chairwoman Laura McDiarmid to appeal to the crowd to show respect for the speakers.

Metcalfe accused the board of dropping the ball on playing fields and recreation areas in the city, saying the proposal is a way to begin making amends.

Jeff Malmgre, co-ordinator of the Vancouver Ultimate [Frisbee] League, supports the volleyball players, and accused local residents of NIMBYism. Malmgre said the area earmarked for the permanent volleyball courts represents only 1.1 per cent of the park, which he says is under-utilized. "NIMBY is an ugly word. But I'm not sure what else we can call it. The park is meant to serve a lot of people, not just the ones who live on the West Side."

He added beach volleyball is "huge" in Vancouver and the culture is conducive to the health conscious spirit of the city.

"It's a fact kids who play organized sports get into less crime," he said. "There aren't many smokers in the group and they're pretty much all healthy citizens. We should be encouraging that."

West Side residents who spoke out against the proposal listed a number of concerns, including fears of an influx of bleachers, fences to keep dogs out, commercial sponsorship and signage. They also complained about the impact of the facility on a parking crunch in the area, and expressed concern about the effects of "canned music" and other noise on local wild and bird life, including a solo eagle that's been roosting in the area for years, and a pair of eagles nesting for the first time.

"My name is Mark Weintraub. I do not represent any orgnization. I am a long time Vancouver resident. I swim in Kits pool, roller blade and bike along our seawalls. I support active sports in our parks system but I oppose the location of a permanent volleyball infrastructure in the middle of one of our most precious city assets. I am also here to speak out against a process which I do not think is responsive to the clear needs of an overwhelming majority of park users. This site is located on ancient Native land and is the home to over 100 species of birds. One of the thrilling parts of this park is that when you look south from the walkway and see the beautiful treed backdrop, the forest area and expanse of grass, you cannot but help get a feeling of a time long gone."

David Cadman, executive director of the Society Promoting Environmental Conservation, said he supports organized sports in the city, especially beach volleyball, since his niece plays at the Olympic level, but disagrees with the proposed location.

"There's already 31 courts along the beach," he said. "This is the wrong place."

Daphne Solecki pointed out the park was originally created after neighbours rallied together to oppose a huge housing development on the then-Department of National Defence land. Twenty thousand signatures were eventually gathered in support of creating Jericho Beach Park, said Solecki, who held up minutes from the Feb. 16, 1981 parks board meeting, including a motion that: "The Vancouver parks board commit itself to preventing active recreation activities from impinging upon the natural passive areas of Jericho Park."

Eight years later, the board spent $30,000 enhancing a pond on the site and $56,500 restoring and landscaping the concrete area south of the wharf-the same area proposed for the volleyball courts.

"I believe the commissioners would be breaking their faith with all the people who gave so much of their time to create this beautiful park, with those who continue to work to improve the park, planting trees and shrubs and removing invasive plant species and those who daily enjoy the natural beauty of the park and the abundant bird life, if they were to allow these courts to be built," she said.

http://www.vancourier.com/issues01/121101/news/121101nn2.html

Western Jewish Bulletin: NDP critic soothes Jews

November 9, 2001

NDP critic soothes Jews
Svend Robinson clarifies position on Israel to CJC.

PAT JOHNSON REPORTER

Svend Robinson has mended some fences with the Jewish community. The outspoken New Democratic Party member of Parliament met with officials from Canadian Jewish Congress recently in what is reported as a frank discussion of his views on Israel.

Robinson has been harshly critical of Israel for its actions in the occupied territories, but in his meeting with CJC officials, he made clear his support for the state of Israel within secure boundaries and his staunch opposition to the use of violence to meet political ends.

Robinson, who represents the constituency of Burnaby-Douglas, is his party's critic for foreign affairs. He told the Bulletin after the meeting that he was glad to be able to discuss these issues with Jewish officials and said he regrets the perception that he is in any way anti-Israel. He insisted that support for Israel is not compromised by his continuing defence of Palestinians.

"Can you be a strong advocate for Palestinian rights and at the same time clearly and unequivocally and unreservedly assert the importance of respecting and celebrating Israel's right to exist?" he asked. "And the answer to that is certainly a resounding yes."

"I've travelled to Israel and the occupied territories on a number of occasions over the years and would defend to the very end Israel's right to, not just to exist - I think that's kind of a lowest common denominator - but to flourish."

Robinson said he has little optimism for peace in the region and he views an international force - a sort of peacekeeping body - as the most likely source for a solution. He criticized Arab countries for repression and brutality, applauding Israel's dedication to democratic principles. But he said Israel under Prime Minister Ariel Sharon cannot be trusted to negotiate a final settlement with the Palestinians.

"The question was put, 'Don't you agree that this should be resolved by a dialogue between Israel and the Palestinians?' And the answer is no," said Robinson.

"Sharon is, I believe, at the very least, complicit in war crimes in Sabra and Shatilla in 1982 and, as you know, there was an inquiry that found him at least indirectly responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent civilians. His record with respect to the Palestinians and the rights of Palestinians is well known."

But while Robinson defended the interests of Palestinians, he deplored the use of violence to meet their ends.

"Any attack on innocent civilians is murder and is to be condemned in the strongest possible terms, period," he said. "All human lives are precious, whether it's the life of a janitor or a stockbroker in the World Trade Centre or a teenager who's eating pizza in downtown Tel-Aviv. To attack them is utterly inexcusable and indefensible."

The meeting, which took place Oct. 19 and was also attended by Vancouver East MP Libby Davies, the only other NDP MP from this province, pleased members of CJC. Mark Weintraub, a national vice-president of Congress, said meeting with Robinson was important for a number of reasons.

While the NDP is a relatively small party in Parliament, it has historically been an incubator for political innovation. Moreover, despite belonging to a small party, Robinson is one of Parliament's most familiar and media-wise members

But the most pressing reason, Weintraub suggested, was that CJC is a human rights organization and the anti-Israel bias among some Canadian human rights activists has damaged the working relationship between groups.

"The work of Canadian Jewish Congress is to protect minorities," said Weintraub. "Whether you're gay or you're female or you're a person of color or whether you're Jewish, there is important work to be done in human rights and we consider ourselves to be at the forefront of that, so it's extremely troubling that our natural friends in the human rights community have not been able to see clearly that the whole peace process dialogue has been hijacked by those who are fomenting hate."

It is another priority of CJC to seek clarity on political issues, something Weintraub said was accomplished by this meeting.

"This was extremely important that it be communicated to Canadians and to members of our community that the NDP is not a hostile place when it comes to Israel, that the NDP recognizes that Israel is a staunch ally and friend of Israel and shares common values," he said.

"Having said that, [Robinson] did not in any way derogate from his very sharp critique of what he considers to be unacceptable conduct by Israel in its engagement with the Palestinians."

Dr. Michael Elterman, an officer of CJC, said his group received from Robinson the most important statement on Israel that they seek from politicians.

"What he said was that, clearly, the Jewish people of Israel have a right to exist within secure borders which, I think, is the starting position that the community wants to hear when we talk to politicians." It was useful to meet face-to-face with Robinson and find exactly where he stands, said Elterman.

"He is the foreign affairs critic and we want to know where his party stands vis-à-vis Israel," he said. "If they're serious about forming a government ... we want to know if this is in fact the official policy of his party ... I think some progress was made."

http://www.jewishindependent.ca/archives/nov01/archives01nov09-02.html

Entire Agreement Clause, Legal Matters

Photo caption: Mark Weintraub recommends including an "entire agreement" clause in any contract



Glen Kerstrom



Most legal disputes are the result of a breakdown of trust in a partnership. All too often, two trusting parties sign what they consider a boilerplate contract, trusting that a mutual understanding of the spirit of the agreement will cover any details not specified in the contract.



If that trust breaks down, however, the partnership can degenerate to a shouting match or even a court case over who promised what.



A simple addition to a contract, known as an "entire agreement clause," can prevent such disputes - a point illustrated by a B.C. Supreme Court ruling last December.





The case centred on a conflict between a caterer and a film production company. Bus Fare Entertainmet Industry Catering principal Geoff Titcomb said he didn't think he needed a lawyer when he asked Millennium Canadian Productions Ltd. manager Brian Dick to sign two copies of a contract in July 2001, because it was a standard contract in the entertainment industry.



Titcomb said he believed he had an understanding with Dick that the contract would be valid until December 7, 2001.


When Dick's production company cancelled the contract nine days later, Titcomb realized that he had nothing in writing specifying the contract's duration. That didn't stop him from suing Millennium for breaking promises to buy catering for more than four months.



Because the contract didn't include an entire agreement clause, Justice Bruce Harvey considered agreements and promises made outside the contract, such as alleged promises to contract catering for four months.


Harvey considered what Titcomb claimed was Dick's verbal promise to use Bus Fare Entertainment Industry Catering for the duration of Millennium's filming of the television seies UC:Undercover.



He then awarded Titcomb two weeks in damages. That's far less than Titcomb would have got if he had specified the duration in the contract and added an entire agreement clause, said Clark Wilson partner Mark Weintraub.



Weintraub believes comprehensive agreements should "always" contain entire agreement clauses. He explained that business owners who want certainty and predictability do not want promises, assurances or understandings left unwritten.



The past few decades have seen courts stymie businesses' desires for certainty and predictability by"going outside the four corners of a contract," Weintraub said.



Historically, contract drafters may have seen an entire agreement clause as redundant, non-essential or mere dressing, he said. But, entire agreement clauses have become increasingly useful.



Weintraub pointed to two recent B.C. Supreme Court cases involving companies with supplier contracts that contained entire agreement clauses.



In both cases, the judge refused to consider alleged promises not written into the contract because the contracts included entire agreement clauses that stressed that no other promises would be valid.



The June 2002 Otter Farm & Home Co-Operative versus Sekon case involved a gasoline supplier and a gas station operator who claimed that the supplier had verbally promised "pump support," or a rebate on the price of the gasoline to enable the operator to compete with other gas stations.



Verbal promises also factored in the February 2003 case, Mi-Bar Enterprises Ltd. versus Imperial Oil Ltd., that similarly involved a gas station and a supplier. Mi-Bar's operators claimed that the supplier had agreed that it would only terminate the contract if Mi-Bar had not performed its obligations adequately.


Because both those alleged agreements fell outside the contract, the court refused to consider them.



Singleton Urquhart partner Roger Holland agreed that the trend is for business owners to include entire agreement clauses in supplier contracts.



However, Holland said he can foresee some situations where business owners may specifically want to avoid such contracts. Sometimes business owners feel forced to sign contracts that they really do not want to sign, Holland said.



If the partner who does not want to sign the agreement spot that the contract does not contain an entrire agreement clause, it may make signing the contract easier because the business owner may see some leeway, Holland said.



Alternately, not having an entire agreement clause could be a way out if a partner is not happy with the agreement but finds the contract's termination clause even less palatable.



Holland said it was "conceivable" that the unhappy partner could invoke alleged promises to be read into the contract and prompt mutual cancellation of a contract.



Meanwhile, caterer Geoff Titcomb said he is getting some contracts redrafted to include entire agreement clauses, but that he is not always a stickler for written rules.



He has no written contract at all on some current catering jobs because he trusts his client, Titcomb said.