Why does NORD employ solicitors?

So, NORD Directors decided that they are better solicitors than the ones they hired! Here is the solicitor’s letter to NORD:

“Dear Mr. Betts:
File No.: 200034
RE: City of Vernon v. Regional District of North Okanagan et al. S.C.B.C #5-102268 - Vancouver Registry

Enclosed is a copy of the Petition filed by the City of Vernon and the supporting Affidavits. I have filed an Appearance on behalf of the Regional District and emailed you a copy of the Appearance and the letter delivering that Appearance to counsel for Vernon.

The Petition does not set out the grounds upon which the application is being made as required by Section 14 of the Judicial Review Procedure Act. I have invited counsel for the City of Vernon to amend the Petition in order to comply with that requirement. I attach a copy of the letter which I have sent to Mr. Hildebrand and I will advise you of his response. At this time there is no date set for the hearing of this application.

I would recommend that the Regional District oppose the application by Vernon since it seeks to overturn the Arbitrator's decision on the lack of jurisdiction which was based on the Regional District and District of Coldstream interpretation of the legislation and application to the Arbitrator.

I look forward to receiving your instructions.

Yours truly,
GM/si
Enclosures”

NORD opposed the city’s attempt to a partial withdrawal from the water utility. They won. Now the city appeals that decision and NORD Directors (the majority, including the three from Vernon) are unwilling to stand up and defend the appeal. Should the city succeed Coldstream and B&C customers would be paying significantly higher rates than city customers. Here is the city’s claim submitted to the Court as sworn to by Mr Leon Gous (in part):

“Vernon believes it has reasons which are both proper and practical for wanting to administer and control water distribution within its municipal boundaries. Vemon believes that water rates currently set by NORD are unfairly prejudicial to Vemon residents, and result in Vernon residents paying approximately $2.5 million more per year in aggregate than they would pay if Vernon controlled its own water distribution. In addition, control of water distribution creates operational difficulties in the administration of Vernon's other activities. Examples of this include the following:...”

Obviously, if the city can save $2.5 million then the rest of the customers have to make up that $2.5 million. That is not what the spirit and the letter of the utility establishment agreement intended. They agreed that all domestic customers would pay the same rate. In fact, they all pay the same even though Coldstream and B&C customers have been receiving inferior quality water. Even after the Duteau Creek treatment plant is put into operation the water from this source will continue to be inferior. There will not be ultra violet treatment such as the one Kalamalka Lake water customers receive. Had the Directors understood the ramifications of their action they might have voted differently. Why did they even support arbitration in the first place if they were not willing to follow through? Now Coldstream has to bear all the costs of defending the action by the city but electoral area residents will share the benefits when Coldstream achieves victory.

Apparently, logic is a scarce commodity among local politicians!

***********************************************************************