So here we are…my 13th year riding and fundraising for cancer research. I’m now 12 years removed from diagnosis, surgery, chemotherapy and being cured of Stage 4 Testicular Cancer (October 11, 2005 to March, 2007). 13 years of life that I would not have had if it were not for cancer research and the good people of the BC cancer community.
I started this blog back in July, 2008 to chronicle a celebratory trip to follow the Tour De France (CSC and Carlos Sastre’s year) and then to track my training toward the first Ride to Conquer Cancer in 2009. Across that time I’ve raised just over $94,000 personally and the teams I’ve captained have raised over $560,000. After taking a year off from captaining I’ve now thrown my helmet back into the ring to co-captain Team CCI.
My goals for 2019 are:
Raise $5,000 for the Alberta Cancer Foundation
Co-Captain Team CCI and complete the 2019 Enbridge Ride to Conquer Cancer
Finally lose the 20lbs I committed to in 2008 (Target 195lbs)
Chronicle training and weight loss up until the Ride in a daily blog
Day 1 of the commitment was yesterday so I’ll catch us up:
Day 1, April 30
Morning weight and body fat: 214.5/26
Measured with a TANITA scale
Ketone level: none
Dietary Calories: 1757
Calories burned from exercise: 471
Activity: 1 hr weight circuit
Put together a great full body circuit that I am sure to repeat.
Mood: Great, productive, happy
Stiffness and pain on waking: 2
A friend of mine and I have been in an accountability pair for the past few years…regularly sending each other our weights as we work toward keeping fit as we get older.
Having this as a practice has shown me the ups and downs.
To demonstrate this, here’s what my report was this morning. Exactly 973 days after having started at a weight of 215, I’ve lost exactly 1/2lb net:
Day 973: 214.5 (-.5lbs) 100 day wt 208.5. 200 day wt (the low) 201.5. 300 day wt 208. 400 day wt 211.5. 500 day wt 217. 600 day wt 212.5. 700 day wt 215 (back to the beginning). 800 day wt 209. 900 day wt 211. 1000 day goal 205. Aug 17 (Ride to Conquer Cancer) goal 195. May Week 1 goal 212. Wk 2 Goal 210. Wk 3 Goal 207. Wk 4 goal 205. Wk 5 goal 203.
My hope is that this blog will be an extra impetus to stay with the program.
The official sod turning on Westmount Presbyterian Church’s new multi-family housing development happened June 17, 2016. Many of their neighbours, myself included, were there to participate. To use a term coined by Mayor Iveson, North Glenora has said “YIMBY” to a mixed income housing project that I am convinced has a place in each and every community in Edmonton.
When the Westmount Presbyterian Church (WPC) – an anchor property in our neighbourhood directly across the street from Coronation School – announced its plans to develop the land into affordable housing the community reacted predictably.
North Glenora is a very tight-knit, mature neighbourhood where people watch each others children, volunteer for the Community League (NGCL) and share news over the fence. In other words, we’re no different than any of Edmonton’s wonderful communities.
In the early vacuum of information, fear of the unknown came to the surface. Concerns over increased density, impact on property values and increases in crime were imagined, shared and repeated. “There goes the neighbourhood…”
It took dozens of meetings and hundreds of hours of focused effort on both sides to get to “YIMBY”. We wanted to tell our story in case it would be useful for other communities and developers. What follows is my attempt to summarize how we got to YIMBY and what we learned along the way.
Establish Shared Objectives
In our first meeting with the WPC and Intermet we established that our objective was to have a best-in-class, inclusive community engagement process in order to deliver the best possible outcome for all parties. We agreed that it would take time, but that WPC would commit to listening to the community and incorporating their feedback into the design[i].
I believe that everything good that followed hinged on this first understanding…and that enormous credit is due to WPC and Intermet for having the courage to engage in this process with the community. Having this shared understanding in place up front gave us a touchstone when discussions got heated or when shortcuts began to look appealing.
It is far better to ask the developer up front if they intend to involve community feedback in a sincere way, than to merrily engage in dialogue until they satisfy the requirements of their development application and just do what they always intended. You would be wise to agree on a mutually understood definition for community engagement as well.
Very soon after WPC announced their plan, the NGCL Executive met and agreed that the Planning Committee would represent the community in communications with the developer. We met as a committee to discuss what we wanted to achieve, and set our first meeting with the WPC as soon as possible.
In that first meeting we came prepared to listen with an exhaustive list of preliminary questions that we felt would allow us to report the initial development plan knowledgeably to the community. Questions included:
What is your plan for the site?
What kind of variances will you look for?
When do you hope to submit the development plan?
When do you hope to break ground?
Can you provide a preliminary timeline for the project?
It’s amazing what you can learn when you ask questions and are prepared to listen. We also committed to regular, open communication in order to establish and maintain mutual understanding among the parties. Out of this came a rough timeline for the engagement, including different hurdles and milestones for soliciting direct community feedback.
It seems that the Achilles heel of most re-development plans in the city is that too many decisions are made too early without involving the community…committing the developer to a plan before engagement has taken place and derailing authentic dialogue before it can happen.
A great question to ask in your first meeting is “Are you willing to listen to community input and feedback on the plan, and incorporate it into your design, within reason?” If the developer is unable to say “yes” with sincerity, then you don’t really have an authentic community engagement ahead of you. If this is the case, you might even decide to withdraw as a committee from the engagement. You don’t want to find yourself unwittingly coopted into an inauthentic engagement process on behalf of the neighbourhood.
As a committee we would get together to prepare our approach to each meeting. We selected a spokesperson who would be responsible for driving the agenda. With several parties at the table and so many competing agendas this is important in order to ensure you achieve the outcome everyone needs from each meeting.
We took careful notes of everything that was said and agreed to in the meetings, and followed up by sending detailed minutes to all participants so that they could review them, make any comments or changes, and then approve. Once approved, these minutes were published to the North Glenora Website[ii] for public viewing and posterity. We updated the NGCL Executive and solicited feedback when necessary to ensure that we were on the right track, and provided regular progress updates to our community email list, and in our monthly paper newsletter. Each of these updates ended with “If you have any questions or comments please contact us at firstname.lastname@example.org”.
In this way we behaved like a professional Board of Directors…and with good reason. In an environment where emotions were high and opinions strongly held, we wanted to ensure that the committee could not be seen as having a secret agenda in the discussions with the developer. At all times we tried to represent what we believed to be in the best interest of the community, and made public everything we learned or did as it happened for review and comment by the community.
Neutrality, Diversity & Inclusion
Another core principle that served the Committee was that we would only speak on behalf of what we believed to be the best interest of the community…that our own individual concerns were valid only as single voices within the chorus. In order to speak confidently on behalf of the community, we adopted the “North Glenora Community Development Plan”, established in 1998, as a sort of constitution for the proceedings and asked Intermet to do the same. At regular intervals we solicited direct feedback on specific issues through on-line and paper surveys delivered door-to-door to inform the developer. Finally we were sure to schedule periodic town hall meetings where individuals could hear for themselves how the plan was progressing. Armed with these 3 tools we felt confident we were serving the community’s interest to a reasonable standard.
One of the strengths of our committee was that it contained a diversity of voices from the community – neutral, supportive and opposed. We also benefited from a strong network of non-committee community elders that we could bounce ideas off informally to test our assumptions about the best path.
We reminded ourselves often that every resident should be encouraged to participate in the process at every stage…that all positions were valid no matter how extreme. Anyone that wanted to could join the committee and be involved. We were dealing with a planned development that would affect homes that in some cases had been in a family for 2 generations. Everyone had a right to be heard[iii].
Many of us might wish to comfortably go about our day without having to have difficult conversations about affordable housing in our neighbourhood…let alone be tasked with representing our community’s diverse and sometimes incendiary opinions on the matter. As committee members we had to do just that.
To address the fear of affordable housing we decided to take it head on…unblinking and in as emotionless a way as possible. We realised that these concerns were valid and that the community deserved the right to ask them…and to hear the developer’s answers.
The committee found a series of questions on-line from a similar development, and polled the NGCL Board and the community in order to get an exhaustive list of questions and concerns about the impact of the potential development. We then boiled these down to 13 big questions. Two of the more controversial ones were:
The injection of low-income housing into a community can increase crime under some conditions. Have you given thought to this and can you provide research and evidence that supports why the proposed development will not have this affect in North Glenora?
The injection of low-income housing into a community can reduce property values under some conditions. Have you given thought to this and can you provide research and evidence that supports why the proposed development will not have this affect in North Glenora?
As you can imagine, some understandable outrage was felt and expressed by WPC. The implication that their inspiring vision of providing affordable housing for new Canadians might result in increased crime and lowered property values was taken as an insult…yet I believe we had to put each-other through this uncomfortable exercise so as not to let the concerns fester.
WPC and their partners accepted the list and took due time to answer each one in full in writing…a document that was then presented to the Committee for review and understanding before we shared it with the community.
As members of the committee we took the role of devil’s advocate and felt we had to be satisfied that the WPC had answered the concerns in as clear a way as possible to allow neighbours to make an informed decision on the proposal.
At the end of the day, the property owner is the property owner. We respected WPC’s right to execute their vision for the property while asserting our rights as neighbours to be consulted on something that would directly affect us.
Our assertion from the beginning was that by involving us in the process they stood to gain not only our support as a community, but also a better final design to serve their vision – one that would be welcomed and embraced by the neighbourhood.
Leaps of Faith
In retrospect there were 2 leaps of faith required of the parties. We asked WPC and their partners to take a leap up-front to involve the community in their plans…risking delays, confrontation and hundreds of man-hours. Once the engagement was complete and the development plan submitted North Glenora had to take a leap…to trust that the developer would deliver on their promises.
Remember that North Glenora’s Planning Committee is made up of volunteers…volunteers like you with busy lives, schedules to keep and kids to get to soccer. Representatives from the WPC had a vision they wanted to bring to fruition, and in a sense we stood in the way of it. Despite the potential for conflict, I’m very proud of what we were able to accomplish together.
Our Committee felt that it’s job was to ensure that a robust engagement process was conducted, that the community would have a chance to be heard and that the developer would be encouraged to incorporate their feedback into the design. Once that was complete it would be out of our hands…the responsibility would rest with individual neighbours to attend the hearing at City Hall and exercise their right to speak for or against the development in an informed way.
Fruits of our Labour
On September 28, 2015 the Westmount Presbyterian Church invited the community to one last Open House to hear the final development plans for the site. Like all previous meetings this one was very well attended, and was conducted in an atmosphere of interest and general support. Peter Amerongen from Habitat Studio described all of the different ways that resident input had been incorporated into the materials and design of the building. He shared that it will be Canada’s first multi-family net-zero emissions housing project. Cameron Macdonald of Right at Home Society shared that they would pursue a mixed-income model and described how the new drive aisle had been redesigned in order to address safety concerns. They both went on to answer every question raised by the community…well prepared and confident that they understood our perspective.
Perhaps most importantly, they ended by saying that if there was ever any unanticipated issue that needed to be addressed, that they would commit to taking it head on in consultation with their neighbours.
On October 19, 2015 the public hearing for the development application was held at City Hall. Two residents stood up to speak in favour. None opposed. Mayor Don Iveson congratulated the developers and North Glenora on a successful community engagement.
At the sod-turning ceremony our Community League President was there to hand a home-made apple pie to Cam. Members of the Church team and the NGCL Planning Committee had a chance to reflect as well. We agreed that our shared understanding was hard fought, but, as in life, things that are worthwhile are rarely easy.
In the final analysis, our objective to deliver a robust, sincere engagement was met. We were successful because diverse groups were involved and we checked in regularly to confirm that we were still on the right track. You’ll have to bear this in mind when you tackle your own community engagement process.
Good luck getting to YIMBY in your own community. We’d be happy to have you over for Pub Night at the community hall if you wanted to chat about it.
I’ve necessarily kept this as brief and narrative as possible, though my NGCL Planning Committee folder is 2 inches thick now. In all that condensing, I hope it was clear that this could not have been achieved without the openness and generosity of:
The Westmount Presbyterian Church and its congregation; Annabelle Wallace and Les Young
Right at Home Housing Society; Cam Macdonald
Habitat Studio; Peter Amerongen
Edmonton Mennonite Centre for Newcomers; Erick Ambtman
The Communitas Group; Lynn Hanley
Architects of our NG Community Development Plan; the NGCL Planning Committee (1998); Tim Brockelsby, Don Eastcott, Joe Lennon, Bill MacDonald, Cole Pederson, and Fiona Salkie
North Glenora Planning Committee; David, Suzanne, Jason, Bruce, Joanne, Alex, Chet and Jim
Other community leaders who were always there for reference; chiefly Michelle, Ryan, and Rhonda
Edmonton Federation of Communities Leagues; Bev Zubot and Mark Nicoll
Scott McKeen, Ward 6 City Councillor, who asked not to be given any credit
This was written in the hope that our experience might help Community Leagues as they prepare to deal with new developments in their neighbourhoods…but I hope the account helps developers understand the other side as well.
It is certain that you could ask a dozen people involved with this engagement and they would all have different stories to tell. I was a member and then Chair of the Planning and Transportation Committee for North Glenora during the engagement. This reflects my own experience leading the project. Opinions are my own.
[i] We used the “Engagement Continuum” shared by Tamarack at http://tamarackcommunity.ca/g3s134.html as a tool to establish a mutually understood definition of community engagement and what it would mean to us. The highest level of engagement we could aspire to, and reasonably execute on, was “INVOLVE”. I believe we got there.
[ii] You can also see details of our community engagement process with the Metis Capital Housing Corporation (MCHC) at the North Glenora website if you are interested. The MCHC had proposed re-developing the Stan Daniels Centre, a senior’s home, into a family re-unification centre.
[iii] One of our early exercises was to invite committee and community members together to build a Stakeholder Map. This exercise was invaluable in trying to understand the diversity of interests in your community. We invited an experienced community member to facilitate. This is a good resource but there are others: http://stakeholdermap.com/
On October 11, 2015 I enjoyed my 10th anniversary of being diagnosed with cancer. On that day 10 years ago cancer chose me. This is an appeal that you join me and thousands of Canadians in choosing “conquering cancer’ as a mission…that you join us in pursuing a cancer-free future through the Enbridge Ride to Conquer Cancer, Presented by EVRAZ.
Why Choose Cancer?
1 in 4 Canadians are expected to die from cancer.
Cancer is the leading cause of premature death in Canada.
40% of Canadian males and nearly 45% of Canadian females will develop some form of the disease in their lifetimes.
One of my close friends lost his young wife to breast cancer after a long battle. The mother of a girl that we met at our daughter’s class lost her brother at a young age to testicular cancer.
We all know cancer survivors. I have a close friend who is thriving after surviving breast cancer. Among my circle of guy friends four of us have had testicular cancer. We are all doing great despite being diagnosed with diseases that were sure killers mere decades ago.
It must be said that these survivals also represent spouses, children, parents who still have loved ones in their lives. Each year, over 1,000,000 years of life are lost in Canada alone as a result of cancer deaths.
There is no denying that this is a disease that affects all of us.
Breakthroughs are being made every day in the race to find cures for this deadly disease. Simply put, our financial support of this cause goes directly to impacting outcomes for our neighbours, our colleagues, our family, ourselves.
As a 40-something male who has survived cancer once I am also keenly aware that the bulk of cancers that kill men still lurk in my future. Make no mistake…investing in effective cancer research is in our own personal best interest.
So what’s a person to do to? Quit smoking, eat well, exercise, manage stress and give back by funding the world-class prevention, screening, research and enhanced cancer funded by the Alberta Cancer Foundation.
Once my treatments began, I quickly realised that if I survived I would owe my life to visionary cancer researchers and breakthroughs funded by everyday people who cared. Back in March, 2007 I emerged after 3 cycles of chemotherapy battered and a caricature of my previously athletic self. I was barely able to jog 100m, but I found a brochure at the cancer centre for a 90km fundraising ride and signed up with determination to claw my way back to fitness.
That was 2007, and I’m fortunate that 2016 will be my 10th fundraising ride and 8th Enbridge Ride to Conquer Cancer. With the help of thousands of donors over 9 years, my teams and I have raised over $455,000 for the cancer communities in BC and Alberta.
Riding to conquer cancer has become central to my life. I am convinced we will see a world free from cancer within our lifetime. Why not join this critical movement in support of Albertans facing cancer and their families?
Why Choose Alberta Cancer Foundation?
We are fortunate in Alberta to be able to invest in a foundation where 100% of all funds go directly to support Albertans. To underline the impact that the Alberta Cancer Foundation (ACF) makes in the lives of Albertans facing cancer, here are some of the recent accomplishments and continuing programs supported by our donor dollars.
Dr. Ing Swie Goping and the BAD protein
The ACF supports a breast cancer research program, led by Dr. Ing Swie Goping, that has identified a biomarker that could predict who should receive taxane chemotherapy and who shouldn’t. Taxane chemotherapy is extremely effective in treating some women with breast cancer and not others, but until now we haven’t had a way to know why. If we could save hundreds of Albertans from undergoing this treatment, which can produce harsh side effects, we could relieve unnecessary suffering and begin alternative treatments sooner. This is the promise of Dr. Goping and her team’s research.
Lung Cancer Screening
Lung Cancer is one of the most deadly of cancers. This year alone, 2,000 Albertans are expected to be diagnosed with lung cancer, and sadly 1,700 are expected to die. Early detection presents the greatest opportunity to intervene effectively and save lives, and yet there are no provincial lung cancer screening programs currently in Canada. The ACF is funding a provincial lung cancer screening project that has just started recruiting patients in both Calgary and Edmonton. The goal of the project is to be the first province to implement a screening program to detect the disease early…hopefully before it is too late.
The ACF is unique among cancer foundations…focusing considerable energy on delivering immediate impact on cancer patients and their families through investments in enhanced care at all 17 cancer centres across the province. They provide support to patients, no matter where they are on their journey. From comfortable chemo chairs or blanket warmers to patient financial assistance that ensures that patients who need it receive financial assistance at their time of greatest need. Patient navigators are another of the worthwhile investments that ACF donors support that make the cancer journey easier and outcomes better, mostly for rural Albertans.
These investments simply would not have been possible without the private funding supplied through events like the Enbridge Ride to Conquer Cancer in support of the ACF. You can read about all of these programs and more at http://www.albertacancer.ca.
To quote the Alberta Cancer Foundation website:
We strive to be one of the most innovative, philanthropic organizations in Canada by delivering transformational results for Alberta cancer patients and their families. We strategically invest in research and programs that have a direct line of sight to patients. We are taking a bold, new approach to speed progress and bring results to patients faster.
The people that I have met through fundraising and the Enbridge Ride to Conquer Cancer have become my closest and dearest friends. Our annual 200km bike ride is both moving and enriching. I hope you will join us, and if you do, thank you for making an impact in the lives of Albertans facing cancer and their families.
VANCOUVER, B.C. – Scientists at the BC Cancer Agency and University of British Columbia have identified new breast cancer genes that could change the way the disease is diagnosed and form the basis of next-generation treatments.
Researchers have reclassified the disease into 10 completely new categories based on the genetic fingerprint of a tumour. Many of these genes could offer much-needed insight into breast cancer…
Admit it. It’s true isn’t it? You love the dessert buffet line just as much as I do, or more maybe!? Well, you’re not the only one… It turns out cancer cells love sugar too. In fact, in order to grow…
Read more at http://bccancerfoundation.com/blog