The title and article don’t seem to have anything to do with each other. I’d assume this means they’re putting doors on the left side of all the buses exclusively for drivers, but the article sounds more like they’re putting doors on a warehouse to drive buses through.
I only remember going to Harvey’s once, probably because the only one I ever saw was inside a Home Depot, but it seems like they left BC completely quite a while ago.
I haven’t worked in many places with a walk in freezer, but the several I have all had alarms in them. Not automatic, but if the door was stuck there was a big red button next to it that would set off a siren and flashing light outside.
Yeah, these crown-corp/government owned corp systems are run like a for profit business because they aren’t funded enough to run like a true public service. On the flip side this is exactly why governments do it, they can say, “hey we gave them $x. It’s their problem if they can’t make it work, not ours.”
I don’t have one of these so I’m not sure, but couldn’t you leave the default network as-is for the tvs to work but still plug in a separate router for everything else?
This is such a weird riding. You can’t get from the Western Communities/CRD side to the South Cowichan/CVRD side without passing through a different riding. The new boundaries across the Island are all kinda weird. Another good example is Ladysmith Oceanside, another one you can’t get from one end to the other without passing through 2 different ridings.
I’m not sure which riding makes less sense, this one, or Ladysmith Oceanside.
This is a good thing, but why aren’t people giving the “discount” brands a shot? I use Public Mobile (it’s been fully owned by Telus for years) and I have 50gb that also works in the US for under 40 bucks/month. I can’t think of any reason people should be willingly giving these companies twice as much money for less service.
Ironically, her analogy works way better for her own party than it does for whatever she’s trying to say.
I can think of several times one of my coworkers was guilted into showing up when they tried to call in sick which ended up with 5 people calling in the few days after.
Isn’t there a huge difference between safe supply and safe consumption sites? I agree with safe consumption sites if it keeps people from dying on the streets, but if the safe supply is allowed to leave the site it’s not really solving any of the problems.
I don’t think the original story would’ve blown up if that was what she was initially charged with.
The original owner was the car dealership that’s now selling them. So officially, they were stolen from the dealer, but it really sounds like they were stolen by the dealer from their own customers
Maria Cruciano and her husband Jim White bought a 1957 Chevrolet from Robert Bradshaw in February 2023. After storing it and making repairs over the winter, they went to register the car in early June, only to discover it was now listed as belonging to Grogan Classics.
White called Grogan, who explained that there had been an error. Grogan offered to sign over the ownership slip and courier it to Bradshaw. White picked it up the next day and registered the car in his name. (Cruciano and White provided CBC News with a copy of the signed slip and phone records documenting the call to Grogan’s dealership.)
Yet the Chevy was still declared stolen six months later. The OPP seized and returned the car to Grogan in July.
“[Grogan] absolutely knew our car had been sold,” said Cruciano. "We spoke with him. He signed the ownership. He couriered it to Bradshaw.
“And you know what the man didn’t say to us? ‘Holy hell, that car was stolen! That guy can’t sell my car!’”
This is insane. How is it not fraud to report a car as stolen after signing the documents personally?
I think they’ll have a hard time with her new riding as well as the new candidate for her old riding. I think a not insignificant portion of Green voters in Cowichan voted for her personally, because of how she fought for the Valley as Shawnigan’s director, and not for the party.
It sounds more like a "whichever comes first, which I’d argue makes a lot more sense. The mortgage on the 60% would be paid off by 25 years and if you sell early you’d basically use any appreciation/the full value to pay back the 40%. In your scenario you could just immediately sell it and pocket the 40% for the next 24 years.
It’s absolutely insane that market value of a studio is over $600,000.
I don’t have confidence in the Liberal government, but I am confident the Conservatives would be worse.
It’s because there is no nuance anymore. With every issue you have to either be 100% on my side or 100% on the other side. So many times people argue for and against things that aren’t mutually exclusive. It doesn’t mean we should “both sides” everything, but sometimes both sides each have half of a good idea.
For what it’s worth, the link appears correct. The title matches what you posted, just not the content.