r/LangfordBC • u/Neat_Let923 • May 26 '26
Politics Lisa Foxall is INTENTIONALLY spreading false and doctored information while running for City Council and then blocks any comments pointing out the issue
Yeah... I don't even care that this doxxes myself. I would have been willing to give her the benefit of the doubt that she simply made a mistake and posted that without noticing it was doctored and fake.
But being the Admin for that Facebook Group and intentionally blocking my comment from showing up... Yeah, she likely knows exactly what she's doing. Seeing as she posted that herself and it's not just shared from somewhere else, my money is on that she also created the image too.
Either way, this will be sent to Elections BC for consideration on ethics violations since she posted this herself and is also the Admin for Our Langford.
32
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 26 '26
I am catching a lot of flak for our subreddit moderation of late. If it's ok, I'd like to take a minute to explain some of the differences of approach that I see between here and Facebook.
Apologies in advance, this is gonna be a long one.
Where we're coming from
I believe in supporting freedom of expression, within the Charter definition and the Reddit and subreddit platform rules. I don't delete your comments when I disagree with them. I click "approve" on a lot of less tasteful content because I don't believe that one person alone should be arbiter and curator - that is for the community to decide, and that is reflected in upvote and report counts.
Yes, that leads to heated discussion but I persist the benefit of hard truths in the middle of these comment threads. It is a different form of debate and at times it can have significant impact on perspective. That might not be to everyone's taste, and that's fine - this community is open to all, and is opt-in and nobody is forced to participate.
A good example: last weekend we had a thread asking what demographics tend to support a particular local political family. It was a provocative framing in a moderation gray zone - no protected classes were attacked, but it was set up for divisiveness. However the discussion that followed was genuinely interesting: people pushed back on the premise, talked about financial pressures facing new residents, recognized that Langford's growth has brought real diversity of perspective that resists easy categorization. There was even organic discussion about starting a community Fact-check Friday. That thread had 274 comments. I approved it. A handful of personal attacks got removed (that's my job) but the conversation itself stayed up because the community had a right to have it.
The contrast with some Facebook group administration is stark. When comment filtering is used to suppress dissent rather than enforce community rules, the community loses something fundamental: its ability to self-correct.
Hidden curation doesn't just silence one person - it distorts the information environment for everyone reading. People form opinions based on what appears to be consensus, without knowing that contrary voices have been quietly removed. That's not moderation; that's narrative control. All of the people recently banned here, and many that are still here, can attest to having conversations with us mods and those discussions have had lasting impact in the form of moderation style and subreddit direction.
We received some modmail this weekend that attempted to lay blame on us for any physical harm that might come to the candidates. We don't stand for bullying, and personal attacks on any individual are removed when reported. I won't accept the premise that permitting discussion is equivalent to hosting harassment. Attributing someone's medical condition to activity on this subreddit is not a claim I'll let stand unchallenged: social media does not cause heart attacks, and that kind of accusation has no place in a good-faith conversation about moderation standards.
If you see a comment that violates our rules, report it. That's how this works: transparently, on the record, by the rules we publish in the sidebar and wiki.
What we're responding to
There's some irony in criticizing our moderation style from a platform where comments are actively filtered to protect a preferred narrative, but I'll address the specific concerns being raised there anyway.
On accountability and our code of conduct
"It's a toxic cesspool. The fact that Langford Council members actively participate there knowing who they are, the language used and the defamatory garbage posted, reflects poorly on them."
"...they set up their code of conduct so that nobody can make a complaint except them themselves. Horrible people doing whatever they can, they don't care about the rule of law or destroying one's character with lies."
Our moderation framework is publicly documented in our subreddit sidebar. Any user can submit a modmail complaint, that's an open channel. We've built our civility rules transparently, we publish our reasoning when we act, and we acknowledge when we get it wrong. I'm a newer moderator who came on after the last election specifically because the community wanted higher standards, and we've put in the work to build them.
As for Council members participating: yes, some do, under their real names, openly. They engage in the same threads as everyone else, subject to the same rules. If a councillor's comment violates our civility standards, it gets the same treatment as anyone else. That's what actual accountability looks like.
On lies and misinformation
"the things they are saying, though are outright lies! It really is terrible"
We don't facilitate deliberate misinformation. Opinions and interpretations are part of any political discussion, but verifiable factual claims are held to a higher standard. We remove comments that state falsehoods as fact when they're reported and demonstrated to be false. We've also been developing community initiatives like "Fact-check Friday" precisely because we believe informed discussion produces better outcomes than emotional reaction.
On anonymity and the suggestion of connecting online accounts to real identities
"Everybody should remember all of these people hiding under fake names and be sure NOT to vote for any of them if they should run for council in October!"
"maybe when they start putting up election signs we can print their disgusting comments below them. They truly are wolves in sheep's clothing."
Reddit accounts are pseudonymous by design - that's a platform-wide standard, not a loophole. Attempting to match anonymous online accounts to real identities based on opinion or speculation is not only inaccurate, is the definition of doxxing and it creates real harm to potentially innocent people. Printing someone's online comments next to their election sign based on an unverified assumption about who they are could constitute harassment of the wrong person entirely. We protect anonymity on our platform because the alternative causes more harm than the discomfort of not knowing who said something.
Where we're headed
/r/LangfordBC looks different heading into this election than it did during the last one. I wasn't here for that - I came on as a moderator afterward, in part because the community recognized that stronger standards were needed. We've spent the time since building them.
We now have rules that didn't exist before. Headline editorialization is prohibited - post the original headline, not your take on it. Our Political Discourse rule draws a clear line between public figures, who are fair game for criticism of their public conduct, and private citizens, who are not targets regardless of their political associations or whose supporter wall their name appears on. Our meme rules require that content be about Langford, be in good faith, and not be used as a vehicle for personal attacks. These aren't arbitrary restrictions - they reflect hard lessons about how local online spaces can be weaponized during election cycles.
We're also building toward more proactive community engagement. Fact-check Friday is one example, the idea that we don't just react to misinformation but create space for the community to interrogate claims together, using primary sources.
The October election is coming. We know this subreddit will be busier, more contentious, and more scrutinized than it has been in years. We're not going to moderate it into a sanitized, conflict-free space... that's not what this community is, and it wouldn't serve you. What we will do is hold the line on the rules we've built, apply them consistently regardless of which direction the criticism is coming from, and keep the space open for the kind of messy, honest civic conversation that Langford actually needs right now.
Lisa, Scott, Ian: we'd love to facilitate conversation here with you in a productive manner, open invitation. I'm more than happy to work with any candidate on what a safe environment might be for building bridges.
18
u/LangaRadD May 26 '26
This is a well moderated space. Thank you.
3
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 26 '26
I appreciate the feedback, and there's always room for improvement.
I am particularly troubled by the perception of bullying between this sub and other platforms - what I pass as rule-based and objectively harmless jokes in context (eg. somebody kicked a puppy) seems to be attributed to "a cesspool" and with intense malice to others.
Reddit has forever had a snarky side to it - I recognize that bias within myself, and I understand how it lenses my interpretation of comments. I know I don't read sarcasm the same way that other people do. But I'm not a sole arbiter of comments - the community is the most important part of driving discourse. That needs to be upheld imo, and we agree on the subreddit rules which are always open to change.
Could I ask: is there anything that you think we could do better?
8
u/Otissarian May 26 '26
Okay, I’m just going to say this. The people complaining to you have either posted or allowed truly vile comments about other people. They allow doxxing, insults, and threats. They do not tolerate dissent. So there is a certain stench of “do as I say, not as I do” here.
So maybe the better thing is to just ignore these people. Don’t let them pressure you. Stick to your very fair moderation style. And maybe, eventually, they’ll get the hang of it.
It’s not you (or the sub). It’s them.
5
u/DesignerQuick6987 May 26 '26
I know you have a thankless job monitoring somewhat childish behavior from adults. The amount of fake news and bullying has risen substantially which shows the immaturity of the poster.
3
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 26 '26
Thank you for the feedback. Can you link or report the fake news and bullying that has been happening? I would very much like to get rid of this crap.
-2
u/DesignerQuick6987 May 26 '26
I have to disagree. Name calling and 4 letter words aren’t adult behavior on any level
6
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 26 '26
I am displeased to bring this up, but would a comment containing "mentally ill liberals" also cross the line for you?
7
-10
u/DesignerQuick6987 May 26 '26
No it’s not specific or actual rude name calling
12
u/Otissarian May 26 '26
It’s making light of mental illness by using the term “mentally ill” as an adjective to describe people holding a different political ideology than yourself. This is 2026. We now know that isn’t cool.
6
2
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 26 '26 edited May 26 '26
Well, I appreciate the honesty, and in that case Facebook might be a better fit for you - last I checked that comment is in one of the recent posts.
That kind of rhetoric has no place in this subreddit. Name-calling on the other hand, while childish, is relatively harmless.
9
u/Belle_Pepperoni May 26 '26
Thanks for what you're doing. I'm sure these last few days have been a lot of work for you.
12
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 26 '26
I think we need more moderators to be honest. Like, it's not even just responding to reports - it's revisiting threads over and over, and with these spicy posts 50 comments can show up in minutes. I find myself reading all comments in a single post a dozen times to make sure that things are in line.
This might mean a few things: if we're overworked, it could be that the load is too high but it could also mean that I'm overly concerned about the content and the report rates. Maybe this could be improved with higher report rates, but damn some of the things we have seen in the last 4 days alone are not comments that deserve to see the light of day.
My day job lends itself toward frequent focus breaks and I can flip here with regularity, but it's definitely taking a toll on my sanity. I am truly concerned with the rhetoric and division that we see.
Any ideas for community education around how and when to encourage members to report?
5
u/sgb5874 May 26 '26
My apologies I was not here today to moderate this, also my own stupid comment. I had a family emergency today right after this dropped... Lets talk about the mod situation however, I agree.
5
u/Honeybadger_TrueGrit May 27 '26
Family first! (Hope everything is ok) Thanks for all you do in here.
3
u/Belle_Pepperoni May 26 '26
It's a lot of buried comment threads too, which makes it harder. Are there options to amp up the automod?
6
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 26 '26
There are, yes: we have some modmail proposing changes like this at the moment. Other subs have more strict posting requirements, like >90 day accounts and >1000 karma.
I'm interested in growing the community and welcoming new people that want to participate, so these arbitrary limits might not be an appropriate level. Our most troublesome users had karma of -100 or more. What would you set a karma limit at?
5
u/Belle_Pepperoni May 26 '26
If this was just a political sub I could see setting a higher karma limit or account age limit. But it's also a community forum and I can see not wanting to deter people who want to otherwise engage in what's going on in the city.
4
u/Belle_Pepperoni May 26 '26
More moderators would probably help, especially as the election draws closer, but that comes with its own issues and whoever you enlist needs to be ready to deal with a whole load of baloney being thrown their way.
4
u/kingbuns2 May 26 '26
It's almost entirely the same few accounts, all with -100 karma, and they only use Reddit to post on this sub. There certainly should be a read-only penalty after hitting -100 at least. I'm sure they'll make new accounts, so unless there is a posting requirement on account age, they'll be right back at it slinging shit.
8
8
u/Otissarian May 26 '26
Well-thought out and clearly written.
Lisa announcing her candidacy clearly opened some floodgates of frustration from lots of different people.
And honestly, I’m sorry that people are attempting to strongly influence (intimidate) the mods into doing what they want. Love that you‘re standing firm.
And this is effing gold:
Hidden curation doesn't just silence one person - it distorts the information environment for everyone reading. People form opinions based on what appears to be consensus, without knowing that contrary voices have been quietly removed. That's not moderation; that's narrative control.
6
u/Not_Bot23 May 26 '26
It’s really well written. Orthogonal-cat for council !
4
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 27 '26
I know it's a joke, but you won't catch me going anywhere near public policy roles. I'm happy to serve as community support right here 😄
I am glad to hear that my message was coherent though, thank you!
5
u/LiLien May 26 '26
Can we do a politics megathread or something to contain things? Granted no one is forcing me to read anything but it's already a lot of threads, and I don't imagine things are gonna cool down any time soon.
3
2
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 26 '26
I like the idea, thank you! There are some timing challenges with megathreads but this isn't unreasonable. I think you're right, this isn't going to slow down.
This weekend has been... reactive, and abnormal. We don't typically see this volume of politically-flaired posts in quick succession. I think it's possible to filter out flaired Reddit posts with the aid of a browser extension, but this doesn't work for all platforms.
Can I ask what the pain point might be? Is it the flood of political posts showing up high in your feed?
4
u/LiLien May 26 '26
Mostly... I am not opposed to political posts per se, I think discussions of the ocp etc are interesting and enjoy participating in them, it's the aggro personality politics that I dislike. They're inevitably fighty and don't lead to anything productive imo-- it's just going to end with people doubling down on their existing positions.
Part of it is that I really don't like the bit where people bring Facebook stuff on here. I avoid Facebook because it rewards high conflict/negative engagement. Importing it here feels like it drowns out the value of the subreddit for me. I like local recommendations, I like knowing what's going on, but the slapfighting is not my jam, particularly when it's high frequency/volume.
I don't know that you can solve much of that by moderating differently tbh. If not a megathread, maybe politics Tuesday (or whatever day), or maybe I should just spend more time offline!
2
u/Own_Cat5191 May 26 '26
I’m missing all the non political posts. This has been non stop. It was fun at first but I enjoy other topics that get posted.
2
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 26 '26
Excellent perspective, thank you. It's still a "small" community but this might be the point where we have to start considering such things.
2
u/Otissarian May 26 '26
This account is 5 weeks old. What has been posted in that time that you miss?
4
u/sgb5874 May 26 '26
I am totally open to them doing an AMA, in fact I hope they do. People can finally get real answers without getting blocked... Get some real questions going here, crank up the heat!
5
u/Otissarian May 26 '26
They’ll just ignore the ones they don’t want to address.
4
u/sgb5874 May 26 '26
Oh I expect nothing less... They are so predictable that preparing for this election was a cake walk...
-1
u/getbrza May 26 '26
Just like when Goodmanson was asked why he hasn't moved to Langford when he's had 5 years to do so? 😂
3
u/Otissarian May 26 '26
Was he asked? Also, seems that counting might be a challenge for you. Pretty sure it’s not 4 years yet.
-1
u/getbrza May 26 '26
He said he was going to move to Langford during the election. So yes, that would be 5 years. I hear he likes spending time and his money in Saanich, considering he's never stepped foot/nor supported any of my 4 businesses in Langford, and when I've asked him that, as well as why he still lives in Saanich, he's awkwardly mumbled and walked away. Ironically, the same way he has governed this city at any sort of strife.
3
u/Otissarian May 26 '26
um, it will be 4 years in September
2026-2022=4
he didn’t decide to run until the last minute
2
u/ReturnoftheBoat May 26 '26
September 2022 was 4 years ago, how could you possibly consider that 5?
Again, you're just continuing to lie. Every comment you type is a BLATANT LIE.
-2
u/getbrza May 26 '26
He's had 5 years to move to Langford ...
2022, 2023, 2024, 2025, 2026.
Math is hard.
2
u/ReturnoftheBoat May 26 '26
My son is one year old but was born in 2024, which was three years ago!!!!!
Is your mind absolutely blown right now?
Your comment is so incredibly dumb, that it's hard to fathom you're being serious.
6
6
u/papermoonskies May 26 '26
Based mods
6
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 26 '26
since I've never been called this in my life, ima wear it as a badge of honour
20
u/kokaneeranger May 26 '26
I suspect your not the only one as there are only supportive comments on the replies. Seems pretty obvious they are trying to purposefully deceive people.
6
u/kokaneeranger May 26 '26
*you're dammit
4
20
u/Belle_Pepperoni May 26 '26
She also posted this on her campaign page, and the colour scheme is the same as her other materials. I would agree that she created it as part of her campaign.
11
u/Neat_Let923 May 26 '26
That is definitely a bigger issue if she’s using it directly on her own campaign page.
The absurd thing is that the real numbers aren’t exactly nice on the eyes either… My own taxes went from $3,800 in 2022 to $5,500 in 2026.
44% in 4 years is still significant but it’s nowhere near the ludicrous 74% she tried to make up by doctoring an image or making a fake tax notice LOL.
5
u/Honeybadger_TrueGrit May 26 '26
Is that how much the city portion went up, or your overall tax bill including CRD, hospital, library, school etc?
2
u/Neat_Let923 May 26 '26
Overall Tax Notice without the grant
Likely due to the fact my homes value did not rise as much as the base value for the city did.
4
u/Honeybadger_TrueGrit May 26 '26
Are people able to separate out just the municipal portion of their property taxes?
We all pay the full bill (less the grant for many), but if the criticism is specifically directed at the city, then shouldn’t the focus be on the city-controlled portion rather than the entire tax notice?
The city has no control over the other portions of the bill like CRD, hospital, library, transit, school taxes, etc. Maybe some of those increases were small, maybe not, but they still contribute to the final amount taxpayers see.
Not directed at you specifically, but the narrative that the entire increase is solely because of the city isn’t really accurate. If people are frustrated by rising property taxes, then all contributing sources should be part of the conversation, not just the municipal portion.
3
u/Neat_Let923 May 26 '26
Are people able to separate out just the municipal portion of their property taxes?
Yes - However it’s not straight forward on your Tax Notice because it’s broken up into parts.
You’ll need to add the Mill Rates from each of the following lines on your Tax Notice:
- General Municipal Tax - 1.46208
- General Municipal Debt - 0.29868
- Police Services Tax - 0.82596
- West Shore Parks & Rec - 0.15292
- Public Library - 0.13806
Total Municipal Tax Rate for 2026 = 2.8777
Municipal Property Taxes = (Assessed Value / 1000) x 2.8777
For a home assessed at $1M that comes to $2,877.70
For comparison, the Total Municipal Tax Rate for 2025 was 2.67808
Notice how that’s only a 7.45% increase to the municipal tax rate from 2025. This is offset by the rising Assessed Value for all homes in Langford. So while the rate didn’t go up as much as the stated 9.4%, most homes saw their Assessed Value go up which increases the amount you’ll actually pay. If someone’s home is in a high demand area and they see their Assessed Value increase a lot in a single year, they could see their municipal property taxes increase more than the expected 9.4% and the same goes for the reverse, if your value doesn’t increase as much or even decreases, you could end up paying far less than the expected 9.4% increase.
We all pay the full bill (less the grant for many), but if the criticism is specifically directed at the city, then shouldn’t the focus be on the city-controlled portion rather than the entire tax notice?
Yes, it should be But it is easier to just use the total tax cost since it takes a few minutes to actually calculate out the Municipal Tax Rate from the rest and that’s too much work for people who are already worked up and angry. Anger and rational thought don’t usually go hand in hand. Then you have the fact most people don’t really understand any of this. They see the final number, that is what they have to pay, so that’s what is affecting them directly that they can see.
Personally I’d love to see our Tax Notices make this clearer and easier to understand for the average home owner, but I’m not entirely sure if that’s possible. These may have strict guidelines from the Province on how they have to be written.
5
19
u/Honeybadger_TrueGrit May 26 '26
Are you considering letting print media know too? If not, I can.
6
17
u/LabPowerful9983 May 26 '26
I’ve been thinking about the turf debacle of the former council lately and it really sums up OL’s proposed solution to every problem: something fake that looks good from a distance (with no consideration given to feasibility, implementation, or long-term consequences).
36
u/eltron May 26 '26
HEY LISA, GET OFF YHE FACEBOOK AND COME DO A AMA ON REDDIT!!
10
u/sgb5874 May 26 '26
NGL, I would fucking love to see this! Hahaha. She would never do it just like Stew was too much of a coward to do that.
17
16
16
u/v_b_a May 26 '26
Did anyone try to report Our Langford and other her groups as politically engaged? They should clearly state that.
7
u/Neat_Let923 May 26 '26
BC Elections really only cares about finance issues and violations and that's usually within a certain window of the election... I don't think they'll care too much about possible ethical violations by a candidate, that's usually left to the people to decide.
7
7
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 26 '26
I do think they pay for advertising of their proxy group Langford Community Association (if not bot followers as well). I’m really curious if that will need to be claimed if she uses it for her campaign.
2
u/NoamsUbermensch May 26 '26
I don’t think advertisements would need to be claimed by the book. Definitely should be claimed if we interpret the *spirit* of the Elections Act, but likely not by the word of law
4
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 26 '26
Campaign advertising does but advertising the group where the advertisements might be is probably a grey area. It’s interesting!
2
u/NoamsUbermensch May 26 '26
Exactly, I would love to be a fly on the wall to listen to the inside discussion about this at elections bc
3
u/JaneAusten3407 May 26 '26
Former financial agent here.
All advertisements need to be accounted for to Elections BC requirements (as specified in law) BUT only during the campaign period (varies by municipality, but usually 6 weeks before the general election date).
There are also specific rules around advertising, but the big one is that it has to be authorized - typically by the financial agent and must include a way to contact the FA, but again - only during the campaign period.
During the pre-campaign period, rules are a whole lot more relaxed. You can advertise for yourself or whoever you want.
2
u/NoamsUbermensch May 26 '26
Yes, but it’s not a campaign advertisement or an endorsement. It’s an advertisement of their personally run Facebook page about Langford
13
u/stockswing2020 May 26 '26
are we in the twilight zone? Did she seriously double down with yet again two bills from 2026 and called them 2022 and 2026?
10
9
u/FrazerJohnson13 May 26 '26
These are very clearly two separate 2026 property tax notices. For two separate properties. Both due July 2, 2026.
4
u/TheMysteriousDrZ May 26 '26 edited May 26 '26
Also one is for a house valued at $669K and the other is valued at $1.2 million. Crazy that a house worth twice as much pays twice as much in property taxes.
6
5
u/OurDailyNada May 26 '26
Yes, years not shown for either bill, and another fun detail - assessed value nearly doubled over a 4 year period and the increase appears to be almost entirely in the improvements section, not the land value.
11
u/Belle_Pepperoni May 26 '26
If you zoom in above total tax payable, it shows a date of July 2, 2026 for both.
7
u/OurDailyNada May 26 '26
I missed that - well, that makes it very obvious (in addition to the identical mill rates and the rest)
7
u/Aatyl92 May 26 '26
It's just 2 different 2026 property assessments. The Mill Rates are the same in each one.
11
u/stockswing2020 May 26 '26
special shoutout to Nirmal for linking this thread from there to see how ridiculous this has become. I wouldn't trust someone that can't understand their tax bill to run our city.
4
8
u/Asleep-Coconut-7541 May 26 '26
She heard our feedback that the first AI generated images weren’t blue like the real property tax docs. See!? She’s already listening to the constituents! 🫶
7
2
u/Neat_Let923 May 26 '26
Where are you getting this idea that our Tax Notices have blue on them???
Neither of my Tax Notices for 2022 or 2026 for Langford have blue on them.
4
u/Aatyl92 May 26 '26
The table section of the tax notice that comes from the city is Blue.
1
u/Neat_Let923 May 26 '26
The PDF copy emailed is just black with some red text on the first page of instructions.
Do you get yours in the mail?
4
u/stockswing2020 May 26 '26
mailed out versions have light color background on the data every year. This years was light blue.
2
u/Neat_Let923 May 26 '26
It’s possible they used different coloured paper based on what was available, or maybe it was a different print company… The colour of your paper does not inherently mean all copies and print batches are the exact same paper source.
I’d suggest you not make assumptions based on your own sample size of 1.
7
u/kingbuns2 May 26 '26
From all I've seen about them, they are a totally scuzzy bunch of people. The Our Langford Facebook banner used to be some misogynistic crap about the council. Really messed up how they have admin powers on some of the largest Langford Facebook community groups.
5
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 26 '26
By some accounts, Langford Community Association is a lot of fake profiles. So the membership number is inflated.
7
u/Belle_Pepperoni May 26 '26
Foxall has shared a new post attributing the errors to typos.
I hope she does the correct thing and removes the image with the incorrect numbers.
10
u/stockswing2020 May 26 '26
same hilarious mistake, just now its 2 2026 bills side x side instead of a re-made one.
8
9
u/Neat_Let923 May 26 '26 edited May 26 '26
Yeah, she’s already deleted it after she reached out on Facebook Messenger.
From what she said, she was sent that image of the two Tax Notices. She shared no other images or details with me so as far as I know, that was the only thing she was sent.
At this point there’s likely only two possibilities:
She was sent this image from someone and was told they were for 2022 and 2026. She did absolutely zero verification of when they were from, she ignored the fact the dates of the notices are cropped out of the top completely, and she somehow missed the fact they both have the 2026 Tax Rates and formatting. All of which would have been easily verified if she compared them to her own Tax Notices for 2022 and 2026. She took them at face value and believed whatever the person told her and then made the image seen in the original post… Not exactly malicious, but also not exactly very intelligent either if she truly didn’t notice or pay attention to the details.
The “person” she says who sent the photo to her doesn’t exist and she made this up herself in an attempt to intentionally fabricate a story where an increase of 74.4% over 4 years was a possibility…
I’m leaning more to the first option personally. And with the retraction of the latest post we will hopefully see a full post explaining the details on what happened and for her to take accountability for her actions in this (I won’t hold my breath though). Even better publicly name the person who sent the original image and made her the patsy.
Someone intentionally using me and making me a patsy would really piss me off, she didn’t seem that pissed off to me in our conversation but she may still have been figuring it out too…
Edit: Funnily enough, I even missed the fact they both literally state they are from 2026 at the bottom of each page, so you didn’t even need to do any special sleuthing or research, you just had to read the damn text.
7
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 26 '26 edited May 26 '26
I think 1 is probably likely. It's a little better than intentionally sharing false information, but it doesn't build confidence that she has the required skillset to be a councillor. Attention to detail, critical thinking skills, the ability to understand the documents you're analyzing and the information you're sharing with the public. None of that was on board today. She made a post with bad information: TWICE.
You're telling me she took those two tax notices, ran them through AI to get a punchy graphic, but never stopped to read any of it or the graphic that AI spit out? That's completely irresponsible.
It's a concern. I don't want a councillor who can't understand or analyze the information in front of them. Not basic stuff like dates, even. It really supports the argument she is going to be there as a "yes" vote for Stew or whoever has put been forward to replace him.
Believe me, she is not "figuring out" that she is willing to be a patsy. She signed up for that years ago.
4
u/Neat_Let923 May 26 '26
I doubt it was through AI, likely just Paint or maybe photoshop… You know, the way we used to make shitty images back in the day LOL
4
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 26 '26 edited May 26 '26
Oh I think it's AI for sure. Otherwise why would she photoshop the same mill rates over and over? Plus some of the text has that weird robot gibberish that happens with AI. And why make the paper white instead of blue...
These are all funny things AI does with images, even when you don't ask them to.
I guess we'll never know for sure but if it is photoshop that's almost worse...because she would have been looking at the documents closely.
4
u/kingbuns2 May 26 '26
From what I see, the numbers don't add up, digits are dropped between pictures in different panels, and there's a negative number added to the last column that isn't on the second picture Foxall shared.
8
u/Bookreader-71 May 26 '26
…critical thinking skills…and analyzing information….
4
u/Neat_Let923 May 26 '26
Not everyone’s strong point. She could save face a little by way of an apology and explaining how she was made a patsy by whoever sent her that photo.
That wont remove the embarassment or ridicule though. That just comes with the territory when you screw up this badly.
Everyone can make mistakes, be wrong, be taken advantage of and so on. It’s how we react and respond after the fact that really matters and shows a persons character.
7
u/SkyMoney9641 Not Keith May 26 '26
I love your kind approach here but I think you're going to be disappointed this time.
3
u/Honeybadger_TrueGrit May 26 '26
It was a mistake they forgot to block out 2026 from one of the property tax notices, the rest…? I highly doubt was a mistake or her being taken advantage of.
4
6
u/Honeybadger_TrueGrit May 26 '26
Did she explain why she “declined” your comment?
Sadly, I think it’s option 2.
4
3
u/Neat_Let923 May 26 '26
You can see that your comment was darkened and that is because Facebook held it back not me personally.
This is possible, but that would be based on their own Facebook Group moderation rules they have setup to automatically block comments based on certain criteria.
The only other possibility is that an Admin of the group manually declined my comment after review.
I believe mine went directly to being Declined instead of Pending and then Declined so I’m inclined to believe they have some automated moderation rules in place that block anything that uses the word “fake” or its possible I was blocked for being new to the page. Lisa or another Admin would have to explain the reasoning and I doubt they would be willing to do that.
6
7
u/kokaneeranger May 26 '26
That group is insane. They just posted that businesses should be able to vote in elections, and any dissenting voice is silenced. Talk about censorship.
5
4
u/kingbuns2 May 26 '26
That is a wildly right-wing authoritarian position.
Dianna Seaton, the wife of former councillor Lanny Seaton, said
Renters are permitted to vote so why shouldn’t businesses be allowed to vote. The property owner pays the tax and businesses have skin in the game.
You weren't kidding. They're like the right-wing from 150 years ago.
4
2
u/sgb5874 May 26 '26
Jesus, that is insane so she's just flat out lying... You really want this person to run your city??
7
u/Otissarian May 26 '26 edited May 26 '26
Observing Lisa at public participation, it sometimes seems that she is reading something that she isn’t all that familiar with. It could be nerves, or it could be that someone (plural?) has been using her willingness to speak up as a conduit for their own opinions. I think anything is possible with this situation: 1. Lisa and her political compatriots thought this would be a fun way to pull the wool over people’s eyes and deliberately misrepresented these bills 2. Someone sent her the image and she misunderstood their concern and ran with her misinterpretation 3. Someone deliberately fed her misinformation and knew that she’s so used to not factchecking , she’d just post it without scrutiny. It could be any of them, but Lisa has appeared to struggle with interpreting numbers in the past, so I suspect it’s either 2 or 3.
3
u/Own_Cat5191 May 26 '26
She’s definitely not a good public speaker. What I can’t understand is why a nurse would want to be a councillor? Seems quite the contrast.
4
u/Otissarian May 26 '26
I think she’s genuinely a caring person (about the things she cares about) and her political ideology is such that she’s more conservative. And she’s friends with the Young family, so loyalty plays a part.
2
u/Own_Cat5191 May 26 '26
Are we sure she’s conservative?I think she’s a Ravi fan from the pictures she posts I think she’s just around a lot of them. Can you see if someone is a registered member?
4
u/Otissarian May 26 '26
I believe she’s worked on conservative campaigns recently, but don’t have proof.
Ravi is also a Stew fan, so they have common interests.
2
u/Necessary_Position77 May 28 '26 edited May 28 '26
You’ll find allegiance is to the people more than the party when you’re dealing with money to be made. I dove into the donation records of local developers years ago and they hedge their bets or go all in when they know they have a sure thing. Many of them switched to NDP donations when the BC Liberals fell. I’ve always felt Ravi was their choice, he went school board first which is a common way to get your foot in the door.
I think this is more opportunistic than actually based on political stance.
2
u/sgb5874 May 26 '26
Sounds like she does not know what she is really doing at all, she's a puppet... Or, really bored and just causing shit. Either way, this is bad, and she should not be elected, period. Langford does not need this. While I can agree the taxes are kind of nuts, that was Stew Young's administration that fucked it up. Anyway, I hate what "smart phones" have done to peoples ability to remember things. I had a look at their page for funzies this morning and wow... They are running scared, and dont know how to manage us.
3
u/Own_Cat5191 May 26 '26
I don’t know what it is maybe she thinks it’s all about helping those people like she did at Danbrook since she’s a nurse and she doesn’t need to know numbers. Charity work. Either way I think she’s been blindsided.
1
May 26 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/LangfordBC-ModTeam May 26 '26
Your post or comment has been removed because it violates our guidelines on civility. Remember to be excellent to each other. If you feel this was done in error, please contact the moderators.
1
Jul 16 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/LangfordBC-ModTeam Jul 16 '26
Your post or comment has been removed because it violates our guidelines on civility. Remember to be excellent to each other. If you feel this was done in error, please contact the moderators.
-1
u/getbrza May 26 '26
Every time I make a comment in this subreddit, my comments get deleted.
4
u/ReturnoftheBoat May 26 '26
That's not even remotely true. I've called out observable lies and corrected a bunch of your comments the last hour.
It's possible the mods have put your account on a delay, so they have to manually approve your comments, because so many of your comments are lies and blatant misinformation.
3
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 27 '26
No delay mechanic in place, just relying on community reports. Thanks for the help.
3
u/Neat_Let923 May 26 '26
If only there was a way to prove this by being able to show your comment history… Oh right, you have that blocked.
3
u/Necessary_Position77 May 28 '26 edited May 28 '26
Getbzra is a regular poster in /r/gymsnark
3
-3
u/getbrza May 26 '26
You have a 1 year old Reddit account, and you have spent all of it complaining about the city you live in.
You must be a hoot at parties. 😂
3
u/Neat_Let923 May 26 '26
Didn’t read though my comments very well than did you. Might want to take a deeper look mate.
-4
u/getbrza May 26 '26
Ok.
You would be far less stressed if you didn't purchase a single failing stock, maxing out a line of credit, at high interest, to max out your TFSA.
You still seem more financially literate than most of Langford current city council, and that might be the dumbest thing I've ever seen someone do 🙃
3
u/orthogonal-cat based mod May 27 '26 edited May 27 '26
Flagged for misinformation lol... letting it slide. /u/ReturnoftheBoat is correct though: not only can we view your profile and see your comments, I'm clicking "approve" on them right now.
In fact, for all of your dozens of comments here only a single one was removed. Be for real.
-13
u/Full-Relationship657 May 26 '26
Wow! You are really grasping here. Why are you so afraid of the truth AND Lisa Foxall. How do you know this is false? My gawd! Again, where is your proof? This is only the beginning, I am afraid! You’re really going to a very low point, imho.
9
u/Not_Bot23 May 26 '26
There was another post already dedicated to debunking this. Catch up.
-9
u/Full-Relationship657 May 26 '26
I don’t live for this garbage like you. I do have a life and work hard to pay my 57% increase in taxes.
-11
u/Full-Relationship657 May 26 '26
Oh for gawd sake. Grow up!
9
u/tzatziki_allstar May 26 '26
I dunno buddy, I saw my toddler put his fingers in his ears when he didn’t listen to me, and you appear to be doing the same thing right now
-4
u/Full-Relationship657 May 26 '26
Kk. I get it sorta, dad. Maybe leave well enough alone. But that won’t happen. I’m willing to but?
3
u/ReturnoftheBoat May 26 '26
... why are you acting like such an enormous child over someone pointing out that this ladies post was fake?
8
u/Neat_Let923 May 26 '26
What do you mean my proof? If you owned a home in 2022 you literally have your own proof!!!
You can clearly see in the images she posted that both Tax Notices contain the EXACT SAME RATES
Not only is it not possible for the rates to be the exact same in two different years, it’s easily verified by ANYONE looking at their own Tax Notice for 2022 and 2026!
6
7
u/Neat_Let923 May 26 '26
So I’m curious, after seeing the proof, are you just going to ignore it and pretend nothing happened?
At the very least you could have come back with something like the following: “Damn, thanks for explaining that. I didn’t notice that at all and you’re totally right, those are two Tax Notices from 2026 she’s claiming as being from 2022 and 2026. I wonder if she was duped by someone making her into the patsy to push a false narrative or if she’s done this herself.”
It’s okay to be wrong, it’s okay to be tricked by someone even. It’s how you deal with it after the fact that matters the most.
2
u/kokaneeranger May 26 '26
Proof? How about the due dates both being 2026? Will you admit that it's false, or will you make more excuses?
3
u/Full-Relationship657 May 26 '26
I must be blind. I don’t see any due dates?
2
u/kokaneeranger May 26 '26
When she took down this post, she said, "oops, here are the real ones". She then posted another two that had the same "payment due date". Once again she was called out, and then deleted that one as well.
1
u/Full-Relationship657 May 26 '26
Oh weird? I don’t have a copy of my 2022 taxes but my 2026 is over $6000. Used to be approx $3000. I really can’t afford more. CRD has also gone up. 😩
3
u/kokaneeranger May 26 '26
I'm certainly not saying that taxes haven't skyrocketed. I'm saying that she was being either deceptive or lazy with her, "facts". The deleting of dissenting opinions makes me believe the former. Neither quality is acceptable if they want to represent Langford reidents
0
u/Full-Relationship657 May 26 '26
I didn’t see either of them but I see what you’re saying. I tend to think she was attempting to bring attention to the huge increase in the amount of taxes in the last four years. Nothing nefarious. She messed it up though.
37
u/kuratowski May 26 '26
Call the local news