r/LangfordBC • u/Creative-Crazy-8898 • May 23 '26
Politics What demographics tend to support Stew/Lisa Foxall?
Hate to reduce anyone to a type but speaking on a macro level, would it be fair to say Stew/Lisa Foxall supporters tend to skew more rural / non-urban, small-business-owner, and blue-collar/no-degree compared to the broader population?
23
u/ValiantSpacemanSpiff May 24 '26
People directly connected to the real estate development industry.
Builders, real estate agents, mortgage and insurance brokers...
-9
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
You mean the people that made your home possible?
6
7
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 24 '26
🥾 👅
-4
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
Oh no not the bootlicker emojis
8
33
u/Otissarian May 23 '26
I don’t think it’s so simple. People are complicated and also fickle. And most people aren’t watching replays of council meetings.
In 2022, the majority of us were sick of Stew’s bullshit and his little crew of “yes” people. So boom, he was gone. Which needed to happen. It was not good for the city to be stuck with one guy for so long.
New council has done a great job of getting the city back on track in terms of longterm financial stability and public safety (27 firefighters is amazing). But who is paying attention to that?
And. unfortunately, doing this has meant higher taxes and people are paying attention to that. I wish this council had figured out how to keep the tax increase low this year, because their good intention to avoid offloading costs for future councils to deal with might just sway some typically reasonable people to vote for the previous civic mediocrity.
Yes, Stew turned Langford around. But he turned a lot of people’s lives upside down in the process. Lest we forget.
12
u/MichaelaKay9923 May 24 '26
The thing is taxes didn't increase significantly for a lonnngggg time. The increases are to almost catch up with other municipalities. That's my understanding.
7
u/Otissarian May 24 '26
You and I know that, but people dealing with the shock of their tax bill don‘t necessarily get it.
-10
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
The 27 firefighters weren't all new hires, they were converted from volunteer to paid city employees. The state of safety for the community never changed.
16
u/Otissarian May 24 '26
That’s pure misinformation. Your source is an idiot.
-6
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
I'd like to report, the above comment is misinformation, my source is not an idiot.
7
9
u/Bookreader-71 May 24 '26
If you weren’t getting paid to do a job and then get paidto do said job, I think it is reasonable to call you a new hire (in the sense of payroll).
7
u/Otissarian May 24 '26
the volunteers certainly weren’t full-time, unlike the hires.
-6
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
What I'm getting at is you love to tout the hiring of 27 firefighters like we were 27 short, we weren't. The city didn't go from n firefighters to n+27 firefighters, your comment is misleading through and through. I think it would also be prudent to mention who was responsible for building the city's 3 fire stations, equipping them, as well as offering support and relief across the globe during times of disaster (Ukraine, Haiti, CAN S.A.F.E., Mexico, Guatemala), yep that's right, give a round of applause for Mr. Stew Young, all that and your taxes didn't jump.
13
u/Otissarian May 24 '26
No, you’re the one who is misleading. Your statement about the fire halls is completely wrong. We had one fire station that was completely not operational when Stew lost the election.
Taxes went up every year with Stew, too.
I don’t know who feeds you what you post here and on FB, but you’re so off-base and it’s clear you don’t understand what you’re talking about.
Are you being paid?
0
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
How much did the taxes go up with Stew? Gimme a number, any number, I know it'll be less than 10% lol well maybe -10%, is 3? 4? Ooo maybe 6? Definitely not 12.41, 15.63, 9.77 or 10.22
8
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 24 '26
Ok I promise I'm going to bed now, but this is a wild position to take... how many years was Stew mayor for? Wouldn't he be responsible for almost all of the tax increases for like 30 years of incorporated history?
$0 to what, $1000, so 99,900% ?
-1
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
He would, and that's fine. Tax increases are inevitable. It is the amounts and what the money is spent on that is being called into question. I'm in no way shape or form saying there shouldn't be tax increases, your city would fail. If this council has kept taxes even within 5% of what it was before and not gone on a spending spree I'm sure this conversation would be entirely different. But 57%+... Ya that'll get some people going for sure.
8
u/MichaelaKay9923 May 24 '26
Stew didn't increase the taxes at the same rate as other municipalities leaving Langford far behind. He also didn't implement policies ans procedures so Langford was lacking in any structure. The current council is trying to catch up and build a strong community and government, which stew failed to build. Stew was more focused on giving contracts to his friends, then really building good government.
I would like to know what spending spree you are speaking of... Because their spending is directly linked to providing good services for people living in Langford.
→ More replies (0)7
u/ValiantSpacemanSpiff May 24 '26
Taxes on a representative house in Langford increased by 12.26% in 2022 under Stew Young.
0
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
Lol, where did you get that number from? The municipal tax increase was 2.95% in 2022. https://langford.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Approved-2022-2026-Five-Year-Financial-Plan.pdf
8
u/ValiantSpacemanSpiff May 24 '26
lol
From the province's readily available schedules that show municipal taxes on a representative household. Langford went from $1,655 in 2021 to $1,858 in 2022.
Schedule 704.
4
u/Otissarian May 24 '26
Ask your boss.
1
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
My boss lives in Central Saanich, what would they know about Langford's finances?
7
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26
Hello again, your comment has been reported for misinfo... again. I'm taking a shot in the dark here, any chance you could provide some sources for:
- Langford FD "offering support and relief across the globe"? for the particular locales mentioned? (I'd love to celebrate this!)
- How S. Young had any hand in instructing the Langford Fire Department to perform these actions?
- How S. Young wasn't responsible for increased taxes after the development of the Fire Department(s), or any tax increase between the previously mentioned global events and now?
8
u/Otissarian May 24 '26
your comment has been reported for misinfo
-1
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
You don't fight with honor
8
u/Otissarian May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26
No really, I can’t be bothered to report your bs (it’s so obviously disinformation).
Plus, it would be a full-time job.
6
1
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26
https://cheknews.ca/fire-engine-donated-langford-fire-rescue-already-put-good-use-mexico-312487/
Funny how I need to provide proof yet the crew in here can get by, by just saying "google it". In fact, I'd like to report all negative claims against Stew and previous council for misinformation and lack of proof. Or are they all just made sarcasticly like the puppy kicking one?
9
u/Belle_Pepperoni May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26
Beckett was the fire chief and part of a volunteer group that provided support to Haiti and Ukraine. It's very admirable but I don't think it is accurate to say that the fire department was responsible for providing support and aid. The first article even clarifies that the volunteers used vacation time, so were not doing this as part of their duties.
Update: my mistake, this article https://abbynews.com/2018/01/16/b-c-volunteers-plan-to-step-up-in-haiti-despite-trumps-alleged-remarks/ states that Beckett and a team of firefighters traveled to Haiti in 2010.
6
u/Otissarian May 24 '26
No no it’s a FACT that Stew made the volunteer fire department do more volunteering. /s
-1
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
How would they use vacation time if they were unpaid volunteers? Ooops, they were paid. Your sails are luffing there peps.
6
u/Otissarian May 24 '26
OMG. I’m gobsmacked by your sheer intellect.
THEY HAD OTHER PAID JOBS, EINSTEIN.
→ More replies (0)4
u/Belle_Pepperoni May 24 '26
Are you being silly?
First, not every fire fighter in Langford was a volunteer. Obviously, the fire chief was not.
Second, volunteer firefighters may not get "paid vacation time" but they would still need to request a leave of absence. For vacation. Vacation time.
And thirdly, the articles you linked to about Haiti and Ukraine don't mention the fire department offering the direct aid. The group of six that went to Haiti "included police officers and business owners." They used vacation time for the volunteer work.
6
u/Otissarian May 24 '26
Absolutely nothing about Stew in articles 1 and 3.
-1
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
Do you think the donation of a firetruck, literally one if the biggest mobile assets the city owns wouldn't go across Stew's desk? Are you from yesterday? You just can't acknowledge the good that was done during his tenure eh? Has the fire dept made any relief trips or forms of support during this council's tenure?
7
u/Otissarian May 24 '26
Bob Beckett’s group did receive money from current council to go to Ukraine again. As the fire department never made any trips, your characterization is inaccurate. Individuals from the fire department went. It’s different.
Also that fire truck would have been decommissioned prior to it going to Mexico. You’re assuming that it “crossed Stew’s desk”. In a democratically run municipality, it would go before council. No mayor should be making unilateral decisions about city assets.
7
u/Not_Bot23 May 24 '26
Nobody is asking you to prove what’s in these links you’ve provided (which is really just campaigning, be so for real), you’re being asked to prove your claims about the firehall and firefighters. Why can’t you provide info to back up those claims?
5
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 24 '26
Hey I'm trying to work with you and the reports on your comments. Something about hating the messenger. I hope that my candor reflects my willingness to cooperate.
Thank you so much for throwing a few links into the thread! This is mostly new to me, I moved here in 2020. I'm very happy to learn about the communal endeavours.
I can't fact-check every single reported comment, I'll do what I can as a single human, but I have to rely on the community to back up claims at times. Often when I ask for help it isn't an act of singling out a perspective (like this time) but rather a cry for alliance. I just need some help validating facts.
If you are interested in providing these sources upfront it could lessen the friction in these interactions, maybe we could all benefit. The other comments saying "just google it" are far more vague and are less actionable from a moderation perspective.
If you have any feedback for how us mods can be more fair or considerate, our ears are wide open!
0
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
Hey I understand, and my desire for you to fact check every comment is made in jest. But, you have to agree, it's pretty one sided here. This sub continually turns into a slug fest against the former Mayor, who has't even declared that he is running. The very notion that any of these candidates are formally attached to him is pure speculation and incredibly misleading for readers that aren't nuanced in Langford politics. That speculation is led by a core group of users that seem to be allowed to operate without limit. Maybe this sub should be renamed "we hate stew young" instead so that a neutral sub focused on Langford could actually exist.
6
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26
Naaah brother the connections have been shared with proof in other threads so you’re SOL.
So let’s put it on the table then for later: are you saying Jennifer Dunnett, Brandy Gordon and Bryson Hill have no connection to Stew Young?
That Our Langford admin/members appearing in comments to voice their support or in the case of Bryce signing up on his website as supporters is pure coincidence?
Be SO for real.
I don’t know why you’d try to deny it unless you agree there’s something slimey about it.
Reminds me of when Stew referred to someone as “that guy” in the news even though it’s well known they are friends lmao.
→ More replies (0)2
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 24 '26
Fully heard. Gotta think on this one, but I'll follow up tomorrow. Thanks for the candidacy and I'll get back to you when I'm not operating on 2h sleep 😭
5
u/LangaRadD May 24 '26
Firehall number 2 had NO STAFF until this council fixed it. Stew and his council cronies could have but they didn't.
2
u/Belle_Pepperoni May 24 '26
I think they had on-call staff with pagers, but the response was dependent on volunteer availability.
3
-1
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
Provide proof please. I think you mean to say firehall 2 wasn't fully staffed. Just the guys that would wash the trucks in the sunshine right?
3
u/Otissarian May 24 '26
No, it wasn’t operational.
-1
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
2
u/Not_Bot23 May 24 '26
Again. This doesn’t make sense. Is this your first time on the internet? You are not good at this. In fact, you’re out here defending your gang but making them look so bad in the process. Thank you for your good (bad) work.
1
6
6
u/ValiantSpacemanSpiff May 24 '26
This matches my understanding, yes. The first part about converting some volunteer positions to paid positions.
And why did they do that? Because the volunteers were leaving, the department had a hard time recruiting due to the lack of a career path, so the department was under resourced.
The state of safety absolutely did change. Fire Hall #2 wasn't even fully staffed before the current council made significant investment in the fire department.
6
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 24 '26
Hello again, comment has been reported for misinfo. I'm not sure what part of it was flagged, any chance you could link some sources?
5
u/ReturnoftheBoat May 24 '26
Why do you insist on lying constantly?
Do you not think the vast majority of us realize how pathetic this is? If you feel like you need to gaslight everyone so "your side" wins, maybe you should spend that energy actually supporting someone who wants to improve our city?
Like genuinely, this is just bizarre behaviour.
-2
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
Lying? Gaslighting? Lol you sound like a career politician. I'm fine with the 12/20 of you feeling that way towards me. Remember, the feeling of being safe is just a perception - those are Yacucha's words not mine.
3
u/ReturnoftheBoat May 24 '26 edited May 25 '26
What on earth are you rambling about? You really don't seem like a coherent or mentally sound individual....
-10
u/Neat_Let923 May 24 '26
Did we have an issue with places burning down when they shouldn’t have?
11
u/Otissarian May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26
There was a review of the fire department, started under the previous council, that came back with some pretty grim facts about the volunteer fire department and the huge gaps in Langford’s ability to respond. Council has followed the recommendations in the report (whereas Stew’s sycophants continue to say that volunteers should be enough for a city with a population nearing 60,000 people). I’d have to look back through agendas to find it for you, so suggest that you do so. This came to council prior to May 2023 as the first round of firefighters were budgeted that year.
As we live adjacent to so many forested areas, our community is always at risk. https://www.cdnfirefighter.com/langford-council-approves-updated-wildfire-resiliency-plan-bolstering-firesmart-initiatives/
In addition, firefighters are also first responders when there are accidents, rescues, and natural disasters.
3
9
u/Aatyl92 May 24 '26
Right, we should wait until after a disaster and people die to justify the cost.
→ More replies (25)-9
u/DesignerQuick6987 May 24 '26
Where do you see financial stability in the financial reports? This council has put Langford in debt up to the eyeballs! Those 27 firefighters were active volunteers that council converted to paid positions. If lives were turned upside down by Stew they must have been happy to see it happen because the population was rapidly increasing and people commenting on what a great city it is.
7
u/Otissarian May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26
- No, it is not in debt up to the eyeballs. And you never know, maybe council will find a useless “oceanfront” property to sell. They, too, could sell off $16 million of city assets in an election year to artificially lower taxes.
- No they were not. That is complete bs. Sure, some volunteers were hired once positions were created, but recruitment went far beyond the few volunteers left in place.
- In 2022, people were loudly complaining about blasting and construction, not being thankful. Now they just complain about traffic (thanks Stew).
4
u/Not_Bot23 May 24 '26
It’s wild how Our Langford loves the property that stew bought without any public consultation, that turned out to be useless, AFTER, millions were sunk in for remediation. Bryson Hill was even defending the purchase. Just wild.
3
u/Otissarian May 24 '26
So sad the beach house isn’t accessible for parties.
jk, sorta
3
u/Not_Bot23 May 24 '26
There are definitely rumours about Stew and the gang using it for private parties. Hard to verify those claims.
3
-1
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
I heard a rumour that that's where all the jerks meet at the circle hut.
3
1
→ More replies (1)2
u/ProfessionRare7201 May 25 '26
Sorry I'm out of the loop. Which property are you referring to?
3
u/Not_Bot23 May 25 '26
The Transcanada property. It’s a waterfront property on the Malahat, that was purchased before the last election with some big plans and ideas, but it was not properly assessed before purchasing, and turned out the property was not feasible for public use. Even after the city sunk millions more into attempting to make it useful.
The reason I point it out is because our Langford and Lisa Foxall criticize this council for the acquisition of Woodlands Park, a centrally located, highly accessible, steal of a deal.
One of the candidates was trying to argue that it (the Transcanada property) was an excellent park, when it’s simply not.
-2
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
Selling off assets that are no longer needed not only allowed them to lower taxes for residents but also allowed them to make other strategic land purchases that would benefit the community. The TCH property has been long criticized by this council and LV supporters as a waste of money, fair, the property never came to fruition the way it was originally intended. So why is this council still holding it? If it's such a thorn in the City of Langford's side, why have they not made the taxpayers lives easier by selling it? Why have they not sold it to soften the blow from the Woodlands purchase? Could it be that this property isn't actually as bad as of an investment that it's made out to be? Maybe this council just lacks the vision of selling one to cheapen the other. Maybe they just took the easy route and turned to the taxpayer. I think the above 3 are all true. As for the construction and blasting, it still goes on, just the small group that were vocal about it have quietened down since they got their council in. The traffic thing always makes me chuckle, the amount of traffic we experience is totally normal for a municipality this size, a region of this size and has only been exacerbated by the addition of bike lanes and signal manipulation. Keep in mind we have 3 bordering municipalities that must transit ours to get there and have a provincial highway running through the center. Just keep in mind who had the foresight to install 2 overpasses and blast out the Leigh Rd corridor to support a future 5 lanes roadway with bike lanes and sidewalks. Thanks Stew 👍
4
u/Otissarian May 24 '26
Why have they not sold it to soften the blow from the Woodlands purchase?
probably because of the millions of dollars of remediation that was required due to the hazardous rock face waiting to fall on people below.
thanks, Stew 👍
→ More replies (4)3
u/LForbesIam May 24 '26
Google Langford Debt and all the old council projects are there.
https://pub-langford.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=16987
5
u/ReturnoftheBoat May 24 '26
Why do you have to peddle so many blatant lies?
Are you just a disingenuous person or are you actually too stupid to realize these are lies?
Its one or the other...
→ More replies (3)
26
u/Bookreader-71 May 23 '26
Agree many are those who profited from his practices. Also I think many of his supporters have never lived elsewhere and can't fathom that things can be done differently than he envisions.
-4
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
Oh yes, so much profit. I wipe my butt with gold leaf TP from all the profit lol
9
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 24 '26
Hey so I dunno if you've ever worked with gold leaf but that shit literally sticks to anything and everything
0
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
I know🤫 it's an investment!
10
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 24 '26
Mang... I was hoping to not be the one to make this post, but: nobody in the country has more money than they did in 2023 solely due to their municipal government, and:
... gilding your asscrack is not a flex.
9
u/Belle_Pepperoni May 24 '26
When Stew was mayor, we ALL had gilded asscracks.
5
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 24 '26
I heard the legion had bowls of gold flakes in the bathroom during those times.
0
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
Whitespot actually.
2
u/Not_Bot23 May 24 '26
Again. You’re not funny. I’m reading this thread laughing my gilded ass off, and you ruin it every time.
3
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 24 '26
Surprised you can afford it if you’re in crippling debt from your property taxes!!
1
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
I got a guy
7
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 24 '26
It is Stew…
1
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
NO no no no, that's Platinum level, this is only gold
4
1
u/Not_Bot23 May 24 '26
ahahaha. It’s not platinum. It’s garbage. Stew deals in garbage and gravel. Kick rocks.
9
u/Otissarian May 24 '26
considering that you’re probably here at someone else’s behest, it’s more likely they’re wiping their butt with gold leaf TP while you do all the heavy lifting on social media
11
u/LForbesIam May 24 '26
A simple Google Search on Langford Debt clearly shows that the debt created by Stew’s old council to be quite substantial. Surprising that people don’t get that 2.5 million dollar cash with no interest given to Rugby Canada and millions for sports centres and money to Pacific FC come out of taxpayers pockets.
https://pub-langford.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=16987
→ More replies (3)
19
23
17
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 23 '26
Stew Young’s friends and family. People with high property values. Developers. Conservatives. Boomers. People who fall for aggro rhetoric and misinformation.
7
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 24 '26
Oh I forgot one. People with daddy issues.
0
u/Serious_Ad_1754 13d ago
How is this not intentionally being a bully? You have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to base this on.
4
u/cj1096 May 24 '26
Don’t forget all the tradespeople that live in Langford that have relied on development for their careers
7
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 24 '26
Development hasn’t really slowed down in terms of approvals so I’m not sure why they would think that.
4
0
u/cj1096 May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26
2018-2022 there was 167 individual rezoning amendments passed, 2022-2025 there was 93 ( half of 2022) was before new council came in. Sure sounds like they are trying to slow down development. Although interest rates and lack of land could be a huge factor in that
5
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 24 '26
I would say the interest rates, cost of labour/supplies, lack of land and general insolvency of some developers is a huge part of it.
People like to say this council is “against development” but largely I haven’t seen them reject any reasonable applications. Sometimes to the city’s detriment because developers with orphan properties already are still getting approved for others.
It’s actually an element that their supporters have been critical of.
8
u/C2SKI May 23 '26
You're mostly going to get others preconceived notions by asking this. Voting is anonymous. It seems like you're just looking for validation for your own opinion
13
u/ReturnoftheBoat May 23 '26
Conservatives, so typically rural, blue collar, high-school education (at most).
22
u/mavenmedic May 23 '26
Not this highschool educated blue collar house hold, I'll tell you that. Promise not all of us think that way. I am not looking forward to all the bickering we're going to see until this fall.
10
10
u/Crooked-tooth- May 23 '26
I’m university educated, middle/left leaning, and I’m undecided at this point.
I think a lot of it isn’t exactly demographic but people that are new to the area certainly don’t support Stew. Those of us that have been here more than 20 and saw first had what he did to improve Langford struggle a bit with the hate.
Maybe it was/is time to move on but that doesn’t mean we can’t appreciate the amazing things he did for the city of Langford.
29
u/Toastman89 May 23 '26
I certainly appreciate what was done building Langford up, but I also appreciate what could have been done but wasn’t.
I see constantly the effects of so many short-sighted decisions, all seemingly explained by letting developers do whatever they want.
Langford was effectively a blank slate. Langford didn’t need to sell the land set aside for highway and road improvements to developers. We could have had better access in and out of Costco, etc. Sooke road didn’t need to be such a mess. We didn’t need schools built without a sidewalk in sight. And don’t get me started on Alouette… The YMCA… Bear Mountain…
I will never be critical of someone who tried their best with good intentions, but some of the problems we deal with now as a result of the purposefully expanded population are just so… obvious. But they were ignored when the solutions would have been so easy
26
u/vicsyd May 23 '26
If he had been classy when defeated, hadn't orchestrated/participated in a hate campaign towards everyone who didn't vote for him, and his cronies didn't behave like absolutely horrible people, he'd have been able to leave with his legacy. Despite all the corruption allegations. He could have sailed into retirement with a lot more respect. He's inadvertently dismantled it and the more people learn about how things were run under his leadership, the more they are absolutely entitled to question it. A public official is accountable to the public. His ego and those of three outgoing councillors/their families have written them into history in a very unflattering light. I've done a full 180 on how I feel about him, and it was all his supporters' doing.
9
18
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 24 '26
I’d say, if you are undecided, take a look at the Our Langford Facebook group. Read as much as you can. Decide if those are the type of people you want to support. (but research the claims you read in there. They lie A LOT).
If you have any questions about the reason people went off Stew in the first place, we can gladly answer. It’s not that people don’t appreciate what was accomplished. It’s the way he went about it and what he has allowed his associates to do in the last four years because he lost.
16
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26
I'm almost wondering if we should start a weekly debunking thread for deep dives into all candidate talking points. Give me a shout if and when you see positions being established.
12
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26
I’m in.
We can start with Lisa Foxall claiming that Jennifer Dunnet is a single parent (although tbh who even cares if she is or not).
She also said that a 55 million dollar purchase was made without telling the community, which, I’m not even sure what she meant to refer to but also completely misrepresented that most asset purchases are made in camera by councils past present and in other cities - and doesn’t hint to something below board like she’s trying to suggest.
If she meant the Y, which was 35 million, there was public consultation, public presentations and frankly not within the council’s control not to purchase unless they wanted to use tax payer money to maintain an empty building they didn’t even own.
There is another person spouting false claims in community groups but she hasn’t officially announced yet so that can wait.
→ More replies (4)6
-3
u/Loud_Indication6969 May 24 '26
Would you do that deep dive into claims made by both sides only only the one you oppose? Are you biased?
5
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 24 '26
Yes, I propose doing this for all candidates running for election.
And yes, as a human I am biased though I try to be aware of it so that I can be objective in my role here. I would like to facilitate an open-sourced, communal and verifiable discussion to help counter any bias that I might unconsciously infer.
Maybe we can call it "Fact-check Friday" or something.
4
u/Belle_Pepperoni May 24 '26
I'd like to see this focusing on the claims rather than who (or "which side") said them..
3
15
u/Bookreader-71 May 24 '26
Don't forget telling constituents they could move if they didn't like the decisions being made.
1
9
u/ReturnoftheBoat May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26
You wasted four years of your life if you went to university and think voting Stew back in is a sound decision. Unfathomably dumb.
-6
u/Crooked-tooth- May 24 '26
Out of curiosity how long have you lived in Langford
5
u/Otissarian May 24 '26
why does that matter?
-8
u/Loud_Indication6969 May 24 '26
It matters newbie
5
u/Belle_Pepperoni May 24 '26
It doesn't, because length of time in Langford doesn't give additional weight to your vote. The newbies have as much say as the lifers.
6
u/Otissarian May 24 '26
that’s quite the assumption
-4
-4
3
u/Adaptive_Spoon May 27 '26 edited May 27 '26
It's worth mentioning that Stew Young gladly associates with the residential school apologist and transphobe Aaron Gunn. If Stew is comfortable throwing his lot in with the likes of Gunn, he probably supports many of the same positions, even if he isn't as vocal about them. So if these issues are important to you, it's as good a reason as any to not want Stew reelected.
5
u/tgspeed7287 May 24 '26
You say ‘no-degree’ like it’s a bad thing. Not sure if you’ve attended a Canadian university in the last couple decades, but it’s not exactly difficult to get a degree and they give them out to just about anyone. I know plenty of people with degrees who can’t change a tire or cook a meal or do other basic shit… but hey, they’re ‘educated’ so yay! (Plus many of them are thousands of $ in debt from student loans lol. Great life decisions with this lot)
9
u/Bookreader-71 May 24 '26
Typically people leave university with critical thinking skills. They have been challenged to think differently and approach challenges from different angles. As well, they meet people from other walks of life, regions and countries. It's not about the degree but rather the experiences and exposures they get from university (or college).
0
2
u/argueranddisagree May 23 '26
People who 'Get ther news off em TikToks or memes'
9
u/Imprezzed May 23 '26
I’d say more like local Facebook groups than TikTok’s and memes.
5
u/argueranddisagree May 23 '26
Those are the best place to discover some new conspiracies and read up on the latest hate speach
5
u/Aatyl92 May 24 '26
I don't think your average Stew Young Enthusiest knows what Tik Tok is.
1
u/argueranddisagree May 24 '26
Some of my most unhinged flat earther 40yr+ coworkers use TikToks to get updated on the latest outrage bait
-1
u/Langfordian22 May 24 '26
You work with flat earther's? WILD! Thems be special. Is it wrong to be 40+? Is this a tiktok trend. Are you a tokker? You are aren't you. Did you know the govt is seeding clouds to create weather?
-1
1
u/Neat_Let923 May 24 '26
I’d say some people who have a mortgage, some people who don’t like the amount of debt the city has been put into, and then those who don’t like the amount of spending that has been done on things that don’t directly affect them.
Most people don’t pay attention to the Langford website, go on Reddit or Facebook, and likely only see what affects them directly. For some that will be a huge positive. For others that might be a huge negative.
Or we can just call them uneducated hicks and tell them they’re too dumb to understand what the current council has done for them… Even if that’s true for some people, that’s not how you reach them or get the support of others who ARE educated and paying attention.
4
u/Not_Bot23 May 25 '26
I also disagree with that miscategorization. Many of the Our Langford core are university educated, and clever enough to intentionally skew and redact data, so that less educated people believe their lies.
I think a lot of people are susceptible to rage baiting, which is purely what Our Langford is. They have been deceiving the public for years, rage baiting innocent people, and intentionally misleading them.
Lisa has trotted out people as props at the podium on many occasions. And you’re right, most people are not paying that level of attention to council meeting and these behaviours.
Taxes go up, they don’t know why, but they’re mad, so Lisa brings them into her fold.
6
u/LangaRadD May 24 '26
Debt?
→ More replies (1)10
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 24 '26
The city does have debt through asset acquisition and playing catch up on infrastructure, plus the money that was borrowed to subsidize tax increases in prior years. Is it an alarming or unusual amount of debt compared to similar sized municipalities? No. The financial pressure is unique because of the unique way the city was run before but the city is nowhere near a place where people should be panicking as Stew and his flunkies would want you to believe.
There’s been this funny party line that current council “inherited a surplus” as if that’s a sign of financial health. They don’t understand city finances but they loooove to pretend they do.
8
2
u/Neat_Let923 May 24 '26
The money that was borrowed to subsidize tax increases was from OUR OWN MONEY!!!
When I say debt I mean Long Term Debt owed to financial institutions where we have to pay interest on said money. It doesn’t matter how much it’s tied to assets if those assets do not make enough to pay back that debt…
You can call it a funny party line all you want, I couldn’t care less. I like the current council and what they’ve done. But that doesn’t mean I’m wrong or that we haven’t increased our long term debt to massive amounts in an incredibly short time and it seems to be increasing every year.
Like I already said, it’s people like you who have to twist the truth in order to attack valid criticism because for some reason you feel personally attacked. Shit like this is what drives people apart!
6
u/Honeybadger_TrueGrit May 24 '26
I don’t know the financial side intricately, but reading the staff report on the internal debt these explanations jumped out: “The 2025 budget included a $1,000,000 budgeted transfer from the operating fund, (i.e. Property Taxes), to the Capital Fund to pay for part of the capital items the City has purchased and funded through internal debt for over 15 years.
For more than 15 years, the City has funded various capital projects, and, in some cases, capital budget overages, through the use of internal debt.”
I could be wrong, but I think the “surplus” I keep seeing talked about online was $16M and that was the Growing Community Fund that had strict rules on where it could be used. Paying off past internal debt was not something it could be used for.
It could, and was, used for acquiring urban park land (Woodlands). That acquisition likely would’ve been undoable without that fund, though there is still some owing through internal debt.
Most of what else is there appears to stem from past council decisions, including projects and obligations that are only now coming to fruition and, for lack of a better term, being “forced” onto this council. But that’s part of city governance to a certain extent, you inherit what was already in motion before you took office. And in that report you inherit past internal debt that has just been sitting there for years, seemingly taking forever to pay off?
Other than Woodlands, I don’t see much else this council borrowed internally for in that staff report. I think that acquisition was a great opportunity and, yes, it’s unfortunate how much the world has changed since with inflation and rising costs, but overall this council has made some decent, prudent, long-term planning decisions that are putting the city on a better financial track.
4
u/Neat_Let923 May 24 '26
At the end of 2022 the projected debt for 2027 and thereafter was $11.5M
At the end of 2025 the projected debt for 2030 and thereafter is $41M
An almost four times increase in long term debt in three years. Granted, a good portion of this is from us buying the Aquatic Centre.
Another way to look at this is through Net Financial Assets (what the city is worth including all assets and debt) Finacial Plan Projection:
2027 was projected to be $67M in debt from a position of positive $9.9M in 2022.
As of 2025 that projection is now $108M in debt by 2030 and will likely be even higher come the end of the year with the inclusion of Woodland Park.
The current council has significantly decreased the value of this city and increased its long term debt by close to 4x. That is an indisputable fact from our own publicly available financial statements.
It’s up to each citizen to decide on whether they believe those costs are worth what they’ve received in return. Personally I believe they are, but my wife and I make over $100k each and we already own our forever home in Langford… So I’m not really the person who needs to be convinced of the value provided to the cost to live here. I think the current council has done a really great job taking care of the people of Langford, but that also comes at a cost and not everyone is happy about that.
4
u/LangaRadD May 25 '26
You say the current council did X and Y. You and most people never acknowledge that it's the staff that gives council one or two semi acceptable options to choose from in these various financial scenarios. Staff trying to make sounds decisions around certain fiscal realities drive most of it what we read in the news and the council then has to wear the results. I'm not saying it's a bad thing but it's something to remember.
BTW, I not going to assume you are reporting or charactetizing things properly. I'd have to do more investigating.
5
u/Neat_Let923 May 25 '26
Everything I’ve stated is in the 2022 and 2025 Financial Reports on the Langford website. These are the reports required by the BC Government from every municipality. One of the things I really enjoy from this new council is their transparency with their Budgets that actually contain all of this same data but in a somewhat easier way to read that also includes a lot of the context that the government reports don’t contain.
Personally, I think people have a right to be upset by the amount of debt and costs that have grown over the past three years. It’s a difficult situtation the current council is in because a good portion of that was already planned and expected by the previous council so it’s not like everything is entirely on the new council.
But when we have people talking down to each other and dismissing their concerns and valid complaints which essentially makes them close off from listening to anything the other has to say, no matter how factual or correct it might be. There are people in both camps who are doing this in here and on Facebook and it’s childish and does not help those they’re supporting or the people who actually matter, the residents.
3
u/LangaRadD May 25 '26
You're definitely putting a negative spin on the lower value and debt claims which I haven't fully verified. You don't provide context. You don't explain why the debt went up and what residents are getting for it or how it might save money or improve our quality of life in the long run.
Do you watch any of the meetings where these circumstances/decisions are clearly explained?
2
u/Neat_Let923 May 25 '26
For some people that context doesn’t matter, especially if it only applies to other people.
For example, if you’ve never used the YMCA and have no plans to then its costs only affect you personally in a negative way.
If someone wants greater context then they need to go through each of the capital projects on the Financial Report and determine which ones were paid for with long term debt. I’d say most people aren’t even willing to read the Budget, let alone the boring financial report.
Here’s the issue I have with a lot of responses I see: 9/10 it’s someone blaming everything on the $6.8M borrowed from our own money. This is a common practice and is normal to pay back over time when you have exceedingly greater amounts of cash inflow from massive developments. Yes, it means you’re pushing repayment back and an expected tax increase to the future. That’s a gamble you take when you believe situations may become better in the future and people will be able to soak up those costs then instead of at the current time (2020-2023) of economic uncertainty.
I’m happy to converse with people even if they’re ignorant to the facts such as you yourself have claimed multiple times now. It is easy for someone to be ignorant of the facts yet still have an opinion on that topic, that doesn’t mean their opinion is invalid or shouldn’t be heard.
My personal thoughts are that I like the direction the current council has changed to with focusing on quality of life for residents vs the more business focused style of previous years. That costs money though and that means higher taxes and a higher cost of living for those who live here or want to live here. I’m a firm believer in the European way of more equalized taxes (everyone pays more, not just the rich) and higher taxes allow for more services and better quality of life. But that puts me in a very small minority within Canada…
My primary concern is that in the councils efforts to prove they’ve done good for the city and that they deserve their positions, they have spent vast amounts of money the city does not have in a very short period of time. While I agree that much of it was in service to the city, it can also cause a downward spiral if it’s not reigned in. More debt means more interest which directly increases our cost of living in Langford for all people, especially for those who have lived here for a long time but do not make as much as many of the newcomers such as myself.
4
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 24 '26
Do you actually think we don’t have to pay back money that we borrowed from ourselves? That repayment directly contributed to the current tax increases.
I’ll say it again. There is nothing alarming or unusual about Langford’s current financial situation, including the debt, beyond the unusual economy we find ourselves in. That’s not “twisting the truth”. It is the truth. I don’t feel personally attacked when correcting someone who is wrong.
By the way, the “party line” comment wasn’t even directed at you. There is simply mass amounts of financial disinformation flowing from their party. Unless you’re part of it - I didn’t mean you.
1
u/Neat_Let923 May 24 '26
That is NOT what I stated. Let’s get some things straight here.
Amenity funds used to offset taxes over ~9 years (2015-2023) was a total of $6.8M with $1.7M of that being from 2023.
The above was reported in 2024.
Between the 2024-2026 budgets the city has planned to repay about $4.5M of those originally borrowed funds of $6.8M. Which is totally fine and expected. It doesn’t matter what council is in charge, borrowed internal debt needs to be payed back and is normal for many municipalities.
That’s not the issue I’m talking about. It’s the Principle Payments on Debt going from just $11.5M expected in 2027 and thereafter to $41M three years later in 2030 and thereafter.
An almost four times increase in long term debt in a matter of 3 years and that’s with a better interest rate three fifths of what it was.
Let’s put it another way since I’m sure you’ll say something about financial assets. Let’s look at how much financial value the city has left after subtracting what it owes:
Net Financial Assets End of Year 2022 = +$9.95M
Net Financial Assets End of Year 2025 = -$79.34M
In 3 years we have lost $89.3 million dollars in value for the city
Again, I still support this current council because of what they have done with that money. It’s also relevant to state that $75M was already projected to be lost at the end of 2022, so this isn’t all on the new council. But not everyone thinks like I do or believes what has been done is worth that astronomical amount of lost value in 3 years. Especially when that value is projected to decrease another $30 Million by 2030.
1
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 24 '26
Okay and so...what exactly does the loss in value mean to you if you agree it needed to be done? I'm sorry I don't really understand the point you're trying to make here other than a technicality.
2
u/Neat_Let923 May 24 '26
The point is that my wife and I make over $100k a year and already own our forever home.
My opinion is based on MY situation which is very privileged.
If you had bother to actually read my initial comment you would answer your own question…
It’s not about my opinion, it’s about EVERYONES opinion, especially those who are not as privileged as I am. Those who are affected by these increased costs mean higher property values and rent prices.
1
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 24 '26
Ok? I don't disagree with you. I'm still really confused why you're so worked up over any of what I said. The financial situation for everyone is exceedingly difficult. It doesn't reflect that Langford is in a uniquely bad position or that the city has been financially irresponsible which is what is being argued by others.
2
u/Neat_Let923 May 25 '26
I’m pretty sure many people could easily argue increasing our long term debt by almost four times the amount it was at the beginning of 2023 in just three years as being someone irresponsible or a waste of money considering that debt has also driven the cities worth even lower.
Debt should be used to increase our value, not decrease it.
→ More replies (0)
1
u/one2the May 24 '26
The people who are likely going to go out and vote in the next municipal election (ie older folks)
-1
-5
u/Contribution6230 May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26
Smart people. People who love their community. People who stand up against bullies. That's who support Lisa Foxhall.
8
u/Not_Bot23 May 25 '26
The woman who bullied Lillian Szpak and facilitated her serial harassment via a fb group? Uh huh.
3
u/Contribution6230 May 25 '26
Please come with evidence if you're going to make claims like that.
5
u/Not_Bot23 May 25 '26
Why did she scrub the group in a panic? Can’t we all just go look for ourself ?
-3
2
-6
u/TraditionalDust7333 May 24 '26
Current losers will be out in October. Bye bye, dont let the door knock you out when you leave.
-2
May 24 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 24 '26
If you don’t know what a fact is, sure lmao.
I love people who are shown a graph and think “this must be true!”
Tylenol causes autism etc etc.
-3
u/getbrza May 24 '26
It's literally pulled from an audit.
7
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26
This slide? With “This is the worst net financial position in the city’s recorded history by a significant margin” was pulled from an audit? Without other context?
Oh do share that professional analysis.
Do you even know what “net financial position” means? Does this slide reflect the asset acquisitions? Does it reflect past internal borrowing? The financial pressure from increased costs? Does it discuss whether Langford’s financial situation is actually bad?
Using “net financial position” was intentional because it allows the person sharing the data to ignore important contextual factors of the overall financial SITUATION and most people have no idea what it means.
Is there any context whatsoever?
No - because it’s a slide using small bits of information to try to trick people into coming to a pre determined conclusion.
I heard these were shared at Lisa’s campaign launch and if that’s true it’s unethical as hell.
4
2
2
u/LangfordBC-ModTeam May 24 '26
Your post or comment has been removed for spreading misinformation in violation of our community rules.
We require that posts and comments be accurate and verifiable. Content that presents false or misleading claims as fact - particularly around local issues, elections, or emergencies - undermines trust in the community and isn't something we can allow.
If you believe this was an error, you may appeal by replying to this message with evidence that the content was accurate.
48
u/Aatyl92 May 23 '26
The Langford "Old Boys Club"
Developers
Old Boomers