There is a housing crisis in Yellowknife, one that's been created by a city hall with a long and expensive history of interfering in the real estate market. Add a booming economy and the result is close to crippling for people trying to find a place to live and hold on to.

Despite the fact houses are selling 30 per cent higher than they were a year ago, there's hardly anything on the market to buy or rent.

The land the city is offering up isn't attracting significant development and people are starting to suffer with no relief in sight.

Sadly, some city landlords are taking advantage of the situation.

That's why Yellowknifers Mark Zimmer and Barry Newman, with the backing of Great Slave MLA Bill Braden, have been getting hundreds of fellow renters to sign a petition for territorial legislation to protect tenants from rent gouging by greedy landlords. Current legislation allows rent increases once in any 12-month period -- but with no ceiling or cap on the amount -- and no recourse for tenants to have rate-related complaints dealt with by the NWT.

Braden says he doesn't want to see rent controls but rather legislation that will prevent "abuse in this hot market."

Well, that's rent controls in sheep's clothing and, rightly or wrongly, could well discourage those same investors and builders we need to take the pressure off.

Unlike Ontario, Yellowknifers don't have the option of moving away from the hot real estate sectors to more affordable sectors and still be able to get to their jobs.

Surely the only thing worse than obscenely high rents is no place to live at all.

While the 157 rental units under construction in the city will bump the zero vacancy rate up a bit temporarily, in reality it's little more than a drop in the bucket.

However, another less glamorous issue on the petition referred to more investment by the territorial government in affordable housing.

That's where Braden should be pounding the table, demanding MLAs take greater action than raising their own housing allowances.

The requirement for shelter is a basic human need and the growth of the territory will be stifled if the housing crisis in Yellowknife is not resolved.

Yellowknife's city council must act as well.

While they sit sermonizing on zoning issues and scheming to make up for past losses on Niven Lake, people just want a place to live.

We said it last Friday in this space: Get creative. Get busy. People need a place to live.

Editorial Comment
Darrell Greer
Kivalliq News

Emotions are running high with the government of Nunavut's plans to relocate the Petroleum Products Division (PPD) to Baker Lake from Rankin Inlet.

The economic impact and human toll involved with such a move are obvious.

With so much at stake, it's little wonder Rankin is so upset and Baker's so happy about the move, even if the vast majority of the 13 jobs coming to that community will be filled by Southerners.

However, this decision is simply the latest in a string of similar moves to affect the two communities.

It's as if Baker and Rankin, somewhere along the line, became the favourite targets of the government of the day in reaching quota or decentralization targets.

You have to go back to 1987 when this series of comedic errors began with the arrival of the Department of Health and Social Services in Baker under the GNWT.

All was fine until about eight years later when John Todd decided it was in the region's best interests to move H&SS to Rankin under the guise of strengthening the Kivalliq Regional Health Board -- the results of which have been well documented.

Frowns in Baker, smiles in Rankin.

Not all that long after, then interim commissioner Jack Anawak and former CG&T deputy minister Mike Ferris paid a visit to Baker with the promise of moving the Worker's Compensation Board to the hamlet from Rankin.

Smiles in Baker, frowns in Rankin.

Unfortunately for Baker, it was then determined the benefit of such a move was far outweighed by the damage it would cause to Rankin and the employees of WCB.

No, the WCB was in Rankin to stay.

Frowns in Baker, smiles in Rankin.

Today, a feasibility study is being conducted on moving the WCB to Pannituuq.

A little salt for that wound in Rankin and Baker?

Rankin, on the other hand, is still smarting from being told the move of Nunavut Arctic College HQ to Arviat (changed from Rankin during the 1999 Apex retreat) would be decentralization's only negative impact on the community.

Smiles in Arviat, frowns in Rankin, giggles in Baker.

However, while Baker giggles, the City of Iqaluit continues to howl with laughter at the GN's decentralization policies.

To date, a mere 195 government positions have been moved from Iqaluit to six Nunavut communities.

Conversely, there are still 253 government positions to be filled in Iqaluit (as of Sept. 30, 2002).

He who laughs last, does indeed laugh best.

Editorial Comment
Tara Kearsey
Inuvik Drum

The Memorandum of Understanding signed recently between the GNWT and the Gwich'in Tribal Council is a huge step for aboriginal governments in the Northwest Territories.

It promises economic growth for them, guaranteeing 50 per cent of government contracts in the region will be awarded to Gwich'in businesses.

But what about the Inuvialuit? Resources, Wildlife and Economic Development Minister Jim Antoine says the Inuvialuit will receive a percentage of the contracts, but exact details still have to be worked out.

Something isn't right here. Any problems with the agreement should have been identified and addressed before it was signed, sealed and delivered. If there are still some kinks, why didn't the government hold off for a while?

Antoine assures the Inuvialuit will not be left out in the cold, but why should they believe him?

Agreements like this one could bring about tension between these two groups who must work together in communities like Inuvik and Aklavik. There is no reason why the government should favour one over the other.

Antoine must ensure that the Inuvialuit get their fair share of the contracts. And it should be done sooner than later.

A smokin' idea

I applaud town councillors Arlene Hansen and Alfred Moses for their efforts to ban smoking in Inuvik's public buildings and restaurants.

I am a smoker and I would love to quit. I have tried once or twice, but I end up getting so stressed out that I pick it up all over again at the first signs of a craving.

Nicotine is a horrible addiction. It takes twice as long to get rid of a cold or flu, I sometimes feel pain in my chest, I can't really taste food enough to enjoy it any more, I sometimes feel dizzy and light-headed, and then there's the average of $80 a week I spend on smokes.

Just imagine, if I quit for six months I could easily save enough money for an all-inclusive trip to the Bahamas

and a $500 shopping spree. What am I thinking? And I wonder why I'm 26 years old and have never been on a vacation in my life.

I've been thinking very seriously about this for a while. Maybe it's not work that's stressing me out. Maybe it's the nicotine!

If all of Inuvik's public buildings, especially restaurants, were non-smoking establishments, then maybe people like me will realize it's not that hard to quit. So what if I gain a few pounds. I'll exercise more to counteract the weight gain, and keep my mind off the cravings at the same time.

It's definitely time for a smoking ban. Children should be protected from second-hand smoke and they should be taught that smoking is a disgusting habit. It's not fun any more. It's not cool either.

I'm ready to quit. Well, I'm ready to TRY. Are you?

Editorial Comment
Derek Neary
Deh Cho Drum

What would possess one man to risk his own well-being for the sake of a dog, while other dog owners shirk their responsibilities all together?

The answer to the former question is love and loyalty. It's something that some dog owners feel strongly, and something that dogs return many times over.

The explanation for the latter remains frustratingly elusive. Clearly, some people aren't meant to own dogs, but there's precious little to stop them from having one or more. It seems a shame that a wolf would attack a restrained dog -- one that is cared for and wanted -- as happened in Fort Liard earlier this month. In all likelihood, the odd stray dog is also nabbed and devoured by wolves, it's just that nobody notices, nobody cares.

Most dogs aren't slain by wolves, however, they are killed by the bylaw officer. It's only out of necessity that this situation exists.

Part of the problem is that uncaring dog owners seldom realize the consequences of their irresponsibility. They cast the dog out -- whether it's -35 C or in the summer -- and don't care if they ever see it again.

While they sit at home, drive away to visit relatives or go out to dinner, the last thing on their mind is the fate of the abandoned, innocent pet. After all, puppies are plentiful and another one can be obtained easily when the impulse arises.

It would be impossible to legislate, but one antidote for neglectful pet owners would be to compel them to accompany the bylaw officer to the dump, the execution chamber.

After that bullet pierces their dog's flesh and the animal draws its final breath, those irresponsible owners should have to stand over the carcass and reflect on the needless death. It's a cruel reality they have created.

Shaking and shivering

Just to add another thought to this week's Street Beat, "What's a sign that it's really cold outside," there are some not-so-subtle indicators from one's vehicle.

For starters, when the door of a 2000 model truck creaks like a 1962 model upon being opened, it's cold. Then, while driving down the highway for more than an hour, the cold wind whistles in through the still-frozen mouldings around the door.

Finally, although the heat in the cabin is set at maximum for hours, the truck still strains to pump enough warm air to match the cold that's flowing inside. That's the type of week it was.

Some of the facts read out in an agreed statement between the Crown and defence in justice of the peace court and reported in Friday's Yellowknifer (Man who set deadly trap in court, page 4) are disputed by the dog's owner Beth Sage.

The dog caught in the trap on Dec. 18 belongs to Sage. She said she was walking the dog by herself when the incident occurred. Dave Edwards only arrived later on. Sage said she was not taken home by anyone after the incident.

She was not in court last week.