Best Easy British Roast Potatoes (Vegan)

I found this on Vancouver Condo info, hat tip China bust, it is a legal action brought by investors who purchased units at the Olympic Village and who now want their contracts  rescinded . They are suing the City of Vancouver. Here is the list of investors named in the law suit: ok J. Choi, Il Ho Ahn and Ra Young Choi,Yen Hai Doan, Tian Gao, Thomas Gisby,Jung Gu Han and Hyun Joo Han,Jung Kyoo Han and Sung Sub Han,In Cheol Jang and Sunkyu Choi,Heebo Kang and Soon Bin Kang,Mi Hyang Jin and Yung Jun Kwon,Mohamad Lafta, Hak Hyung Lee, Flora Kwangah Lee,Sang Wook Kwang and Hyun Jung Lee,Kyoung Won Lee and Nam Won Park,Gordon Mah, Wendy Milligan,Sook Ja Oh and Mu Hong Oh,Young Ock Park and Yi Yong Pan,Young Mi Seo, Shermar Holdings Ltd.,Susana Yim and Hardy Yim,Sook Ja Yoon and Eul Byong Yoon Here is the case, and from what I can understand, the first question is whether the City of Vancouver can be deemed to be the developer of the project. I definitely do not know or even understand the legal intricacies.  But I am an over-taxed Vancouver resident worrying about cuts to other City-funded services or a Provincial bail-out. I am also a student of the speculative frenzy in this city, where Billions of Dollars of real estate are bought and flipped or bought and left empty. A few things come to mind: 1) The names are apparently mostly Korean. I don’t know whether they are resident in Canada or not. They could be German or Mongolian, but the fact that one ethnic group has so many unhappy buyers, makes one wonder if the project was aggressively marketed to this group by a realtor. 2) Are they end users who have some concern about construction or are they speculators who are upset about the drop in value. ie were they speculating. The GetLegal blog linked thinks they are investors who bought at the top and are now regretting their decision and trying to get out of their obligations. Certainly there have been a lot of condo projects built in this city which have been late or have had issues. When the market is flying no one seems too bothered, but once it falters the law suits start flying, like Sangrila and now OV. 3) How much more is this going to cost us? What we do know is that when lawyers have the Government as a client, ie the taxpayer, the fees are exorbitant. Let us not forget the defence that we paid for in the Dave Basi and Bobby Virk case which cost us $6 Million, before they pled guilty.  To add insult to injury Judge Robert Bauman who IMVHO is a very misguided Judge, refused to allow the tax-payer’s watchdog, the Auditor General, to audit the Legal bills to see how come they were sooo high. Apparently the rights of two individuals who have already pled guilty trumps the ability of the Auditor General to do his job and point out waste and corruption. What message does that give the legal profession? If you can get a clerk in Victoria to sign off on your billing, you are audit free!!! I cannot believe what a carte blanche Bauman has given his fellow lawyers! Once again I say PPP do not work. If the project is profitable, the Private keeps it, and if it doesn’t the Public owns it. The financial sharks make sure they write the deals so that is how it works out. The other side of the table are well-meaning but naive councillors and city officials who are no match for the sharks. We are witnessing the result now. Of course the councillors are mostly gone and the officials still get their bonuses and pensions and us suckers get to pick up the tab.

You may have heard that Postmedia Network Canada Corporation donated approximately 5.6 million Vancouver Sun and The Province photographic negatives to the Archives in 2017. You may have also heard that around this time last year, 25,000 Vancouver Sun photo assignments (out of 250,000 in the whole donation) became available for searching on our online database. You may even be one of the many researchers who in the past year has accessed and viewed these negatives in person in our Reading Room. But do you know the steps involved in making those negatives available for viewing? Well, if not, you’re in luck! In honour of achieving a milestone 50,000 photo assignments available (that’s over 1.1 million images!), we’d like to give you a glimpse of the work that goes on behind the scenes to make this happen. The “Before” state—a banker’s box full of photo assignment envelopes The journey begins with a banker’s box. A peek inside reveals approximately 1,800 tightly-packed envelopes, each representing a single photo assignment given to a Sun photographer. These envelopes are taken out of the banker’s box in batches, making the processing more manageable. Each envelope is given a unique identifier, which becomes its reference code in our database. Stamping the first part of the identifier, ‘AM1616-S1-F,’ helps speed up the process, as all envelopes in this series will have this same eleven-character ID reflecting the fonds (AM1616) and series (S1) numbers. The six-digit file number portion of the identifier (that comes after the ‘F’) is handwritten in pencil and is unique within the series, with numbers assigned sequentially. The envelope for file AM1616-S1-F077888 After assigning the envelopes their identifiers, we count the number of images contained in each envelope and record that data in a spreadsheet. Each envelope may contain anywhere from fewer than 10 to more than 100 images on strips three frames long, for an average of 22.4 images per envelope. Counting the frames The rest of the information contained on each envelope is transcribed into the spreadsheet, including the assignment title or description of the assignment, the photographer’s name, the date, and if present, the “twincheck” number assigned by the Sun librarians when originally filing the negatives. Other information that is required to make fully standards-compliant file-level descriptions is also added. So much metadata After all of this metadata is captured, the envelopes are transferred to a new, acid-free Hollinger box. Once full, the box is labeled with the AM1616 fonds number, a unique container name and a barcode representing the container name. A full box, labeled and ready to travel The box is now ready for its trip to its new permanent home in one of our frozen storage vaults. To help the contents of the box slowly acclimatize to the -18 Celsius environment of the vault, the box is placed in a cooler bag and the cooler goes into the vault. After 24 hours, the box is removed from the cooler and placed in one of the sealed frozen storage cabinets, where it resides until someone asks to see some of the negatives. Inside a frozen storage vault Meanwhile, envelope metadata continues to be added to the spreadsheet and, when 2,500 envelopes have been entered, the spreadsheet undergoes a quality control check. We look for logical places to split very long descriptions, for glaring typographical errors and for any issues flagged during transcription. We also check for offensive or discriminatory language that is reflective of the time period in which the photographs were taken and of the attitudes of the creator. In these cases, we retain the newspaper staff’s original descriptions in order to keep the historical context of creation, but we will supply updated and/or more accurate terminology. When the quality control work is complete, the spreadsheet data is uploaded to our database and the new file-level descriptions are ready for searching by the public. Search result for “Sonny and Cher” The full file-level description of the images of Sonny and Cher when they played the Coliseum. Reference Code: AM1616-S1-F009500 Here’s a video of what this whole process looks like. As we mention in the video, to view the images, we need 48 hours’ notice, so we can repeat the negatives’ journey in reverse. Once we have a retrieval request in hand, we will pull the relevant envelope from its box and place the envelope in a plastic zip lock bag. The box is placed in the cooler bag and the cooler is brought to our preservation lab to allow the negatives to slowly acclimatize to room temperature. Once thawed, the negatives can be viewed in our reading room on a light table. Viewing the negatives If you need any assistance in finding Sun photographs relating to your research interest, or would like a photo assignment retrieved, please contact us at archives@vancouver.ca or 604-736-8561. The Reference team will be happy to help. 200,000 more envelopes to go!

This conversation was over heard on the GG Gondola by a friend. Not by me, but by a friend who is reliable and does not exaggerate. Lady. “I am 53 and thought I was going to retire when I was 60, but I just took out a second mortgage to help my son buy an apartment. That just buries me in debt again”. Friend: ” I am even older and thought I would be free of debt by now, but my mortgage hasn’t been paid out, and I haven’t been able to clear my credit card debt before another holiday comes along”. Male friend: ” I recently went into my bank to get an higher limit on my credit card for a month, and the   bank employee kept trying to sell me on getting a $25,000 line of credit. “Just sign here and $25,000 will be deposited into your account”.  I had to fight her off. They then discussed how the banks almost forced debt on people. “Quite the difference from a few years ago, when you had to prove you could replay them. Now they don’t care if you are nearly broke with debt. “Just get more debt to pay off the old debt.” Then another occupant of the gondola spoke up and said he worked for CIBC and that they had quotas of credit cards and personal debt to meet, and if they don’t there was pressure from Managers to get there, that’s why they kept pushing customers to get into more debt. That is were we have got to. The banks have become drug pushers. Except the drug is debt. We are supposed to hope the addict will quit using themselves. And if you can’t get your drug from the banks, there are dozens of fringe outfits willing to give you money..’If you have equity in your home’. Which just drains whatever equity you have managed to build up in your home. This can only end badly.

As a public service, and transparently because I need to also refer to these in my own work in the area, I am sharing three peer reviews that have not yet been published by Immigration, Refugess and Citizenship Canada (“IRCC”) nor made available on the published Algorithmic Impact Assessment (“AIA”) pages from the Treasury Board Secretariat (“TBS”). First, a recap. Following the 3rd review of the Directive of Automated Decision-Making (“DADM”), and feedback from stakeholders, it was proposed to amend the peer review section to require the completion of a peer review and publication prior to the system’s production. The previous iteration of the DADM did not require publication nor specify the timeframe for the pper review.  The motivation for this was to increase public trust around Automated Decision-Making Systems (“ADM”). As stated in the proposed amendment summary at page 15: The absence of a mechanism mandating the release of peer reviews (or related information) creates a missed opportunity for bolstering public trust in the use of automated decision systems through an externally sourced expert assessment. Releasing at least a summary of completed peer reviews (given the challenges of exposing sensitive program data, trade secrets, or information about proprietary systems) can strengthen transparency and accountability by enabling stakeholders to validate the information in AIAs. The current requirement is also silent on the timing of peer reviews, creating uncertainty for both departments and reviewers as to whether to complete a review prior to or during system deployment. Unlike audits, reviews are most effective when made available alongside an AIA, prior to the production of a system, so that they can serve their function as an additional layer of assurance. The proposed amendments address these issues by expanding the requirement to mandate publication and specify a timing for reviews. Published peer reviews (or summaries of reviews) would complement documentation on the results of audits or other reviews that the directive requires project leads to disclose as part of the notice requirement (see Appendix C of the directive) (emphasis added) Based on Section 1 of the DADM, with the 25 April 2024 date coming, we should see more posted peer reviews for past Algorithmic Impact Assessment (“AIA”). This directive applies to all automated decision systems developed or procured after April 1, 2020. However, 1.2.1 existing systems developed or procured prior to April 25, 2023 will have until April 25, 2024 to fully transition to the requirements in subsections 6.2.3, 6.3.1, 6.3.4, 6.3.5 and 6.3.6 in this directive; 1.2.2 new systems developed or procured after April 25, 2023 will have until October 25, 2023 to meet the requirements in this directive. (emphasis added) The impetus behind the grace period, was set out in their proposed amendment summary at page 8: TBS recognizes the challenge of adapting to new policy requirements while planning or executing projects that would be subject to them. In response, a 6-month ‘grace period’ is proposed to provide departments with time to plan for compliance with the amended directive. For systems that are already in place on the release date, TBS proposes granting departments a full year to comply with new requirements in the directive. Introducing this period would enable departments to plan for the integration of new measures into existing automation systems. This could involve publishing previously completed peer reviews or implementing new data governance measures for input and output data. During this period, these systems would continue to be subject to the current requirements of the directive. (emphasis added) The new DADM section states: Peer review 6.3.5 Consulting the appropriate qualified experts to review the automated decision system and publishing the complete review or a plain language summary of the findings prior to the system’s production, as prescribed in Appendix C. (emphasis added) Appendix C for Level 2 – Moderate Impact Projects (for which all of IRCC’s Eight AIA projects are self-classified) the requirement is as follows: Consult at least one of the following experts and publish the complete review or a plain language summary of the findings on a Government of Canada website: Qualified expert from a federal, provincial, territorial or municipal government institution Qualified members of faculty of a post-secondary institution Qualified researchers from a relevant non-governmental organization Contracted third-party vendor with a relevant specialization A data and automation advisory board specified by Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat OR: Publish specifications of the automated decision system in a peer-reviewed journal. Where access to the published review is restricted, ensure that a plain language summary of the findings is openly available. We should be expecting then movement in the next two weeks. As I wrote about here, IRCC has posted one of their Peer Reviews, this one for the International Experience Canada Work Permit Eligibility Model. I will analyze this (alongside other peer reviews) in a future blog and why I think it is important in the questions it raises about automation bias. In light of the above, I am sharing three Peer Reviews for IRCC AIAs. These may or may not be the final ones that IRCC eventually posts, presumably before 25 April 2024. I have posted the document below the corresponding name of the AIA. Please note that the PDF viewer does not work on mobile devices. As such I have also added a link to a shared Google doc for your viewing/downloading ease. (1) Spouse Or Common-Law in Canada Advanced Analytics [Link] A-2022-00374_ – Stats Can peer review on Spousal AI Model Note: We know that

Fabric Living has submitted a rezoning application for a site at 3295-3333 Commercial Drive in East Vancouver for a new lowrise rental building. The 33,158 SF site is located on Commercial Drive near East 18th Avenue. The proposal is to allow for the development of a 5-storey residential rental building and includes: 115 market rental units; an outdoor pool; a total density of 2.15 FSR; and A building height of 67 ft. This application is being considered under the Secured Rental Policy. The full application can be viewed here: https://www.shapeyourcity.ca/3295-3333-commercial-dr The architect for the project is TKA+D. The post 115 Unit Rental Building Proposed for Commercial Drive Site appeared first on Vancouver Market.

When our first ‘before’ picture was taken, in 2002, the Remand Centre round the corner from the Main Street courthouse was just closing. Designed by Richard Henriquez in the late 1970s and completed in 1983, the building was taken out of commission as it became unnecessary to hold enough prisoners on remand to warrant the cost of running the building. In 2008 the bottom floors were converted to the Community Court, but the upper floors and their massive concrete pods remained unused. A $21m makeover later, designed by Henriquez Partners, the building is now a 96 unit low cost and non-market housing project managed for B C Housing by the Bloom Group. Before images: 2002 and 2012; After images 2015.