Below is the photo of the board at Abbotsford Recreation Centre (week of February 25, 2008) that the Abbotsford Parks and Rec department needed so badly for advertising and promoting their programs that they HAD to take over the board used for posting community announcements and upcoming events.

Below is the photo of the smaller board put in for the community to use – after public complaints about Parks and Rec actions were made to council. Fortunately inquiries by the mayor resulted in the new board going in immediately instead of at some indefinite time in the future as Parks and Rec stated would/could happen.

Now, Parks and Rec desperately needed the board for what exactly?

Parks and Rec has the big board and the small board is for community announcements because … …Parks and Rec felt like it or that this is the way it is done in Abbotsford?

And City hall wonders why people think they pay no attention to taxpayers needs or customer service/satisfaction.

I have again been again told of actions by the Abbotsford Police Department that suggests they have a different standard of treatment for the homeless; which is both unprofessional and unacceptable behaviour.

One of the homeless approached me today to relate an incident that occurred with the Abbotsford Police Department. Someone, who was not themselves homeless but works with the homeless, had suggested to him that if he spoke to me I could write about it and perhaps something may come of that. Several other members of the homeless community spoke to me about this incident as well.

It says something rather disturbing about the behaviours of the APD and the City of Abbotsford that in an incident where it was felt an injustice was done, the only recourse that was felt to be open to the homeless was through my writing. How would you feel if your only recourse for unjust treatment was something posted on homelessinabbotsford.com and sent as a letter to the editor on the off chance it may be published and questions asked? I find that reality disturbing.

As the story goes someone phoned the police to say he was physically abusing the woman he was with.

He said that previously someone who had an issue with him chose to cause him problems by telling the APD that he was an abuser of woman. Although no charges were ever laid the APD has him on record as an abuser and he feels treats him unfavourably and with physical roughness because of this.

I do not know the truth of this earlier problem as I lack the resources to investigate and it is not my job to ascertain the truth of this matter, one way or the other. It is the job, the duty, of the APD to have found out if he was an abuser or if the other person was merely using (or should that be abusing?) the APD for revenge. It is the job of the APD to make that determination, particularly if their treatment of this man is going to be based on that claim.

The facts I do know about this recent incident is that when the police arrived the couple were nowhere near each other. That the woman stated there was no physical abuse (a statement she also made to me) and that if someone had made such a report, they had mistaken the horseplay going on for an assault.

The police promptly ignored what they were told by both him and her. They handcuffed him, handling this roughly enough to leave his wrist bruised, and tossed him in a cell for 15 hours. No charges were filed and he was released and left to walk home. Her they just dumped at the Emergency Shelter.

I would never claim this person is a saint. I can say I have known him several years and never seen any behaviour of abuse to women. But the real reason for doubting he was physically assaulting her is that I have also known her for several years and in a physical confrontation I would be betting my money on her.

They are homeless and even if not exactly upstanding or outstanding citizens they have the right to be treated with professionalism, fairness and courtesy. We (and they) are Canadians living in Abbotsford not citizens of North Korea. The APD needs to be reminded of that fact and required to respect the rights of all citizens, including the homeless.

Annual: 1. of, for, or pertaining to a year; yearly: annual salary; 2. occurring or returning once a year; 3. Recurring, done, or performed every year; yearly.

I make available the above definition of annual for the education of Abbotsford City Hall which has, on several occasions, demonstrated their lack of knowledge as to what the term annual means.

When you have an annual fee increase you raise your fees ONCE a year and no other fee increases take place until a year has passed. It does not mean you have an annual fee increase in September 2007 following a fee increase in July 2007and then another fee increase at the beginning of January 2008 – which at a 100% was definitely the steepest of the increases.

Abbotsford Recreation Centre patrons have now (I say now as I have no knowledge of how many, if any, more annual increases will occur within the year) had three fee increases in this annum (noun (Latin) year; “per annum”). Annum: year; annual: yearly. So for the education of City staff and politicians I repeat the definition of annual.

Annual: 1. of, for, or pertaining to a year; yearly: annual salary; 2. occurring or returning once a year; 3. Recurring, done, or performed every year; yearly.

While on the topic of definition or naming of City programs etc.: Should not a swim where the price doubled be renamed from a loonie swim to a twoonie swim. It just seems somewhat loony to be paying a twoonie for a loonie swim. I do not imagine taxpayers/patrons find it at all amusing to go to a loonie swim and be charged $2. To stand in front of that flat, big screen TV mockingly labelling the swim costing you $2 a loonie swim.

As a final point on paying attention to the details: With Parks and Rec having taken over the public bulletin board for the stated purpose of promoting Parks and Rec programs; why did they then have to spend all those taxpayers dollars on two big flat screen TVs to hang at the front desk? Simply because, as is the case with their multiple “annual” fee increases, they can?