Selected Morning Star Newsclips - In case you missed them.

Mr Bodkin makes an excellent point of the untenable water rate issue. He is right, the rate structure is extremely unfair.

The current policy of the Board is supposed to recover half the costs from infrastructure fees (base fees) and half from user fees.

Based on this policy half of your bill should be the cost of the water you used with a matching cost for infrastructure. Unfortunately, this only happens when your quarterly consumption is about 83 cubic meters (base fee: $102.00, user fee: $101.91). 

Here are a couple of examples of bills at various consumption (base fee includes meter fee of $7.00):

    15 cu. m. per quarter: Base fee: $102.00, user fee: $    11.85, ratio:  90% - 10%.

    50 cu. m. per quarter: Base fee: $102.00, user fee: $    47.40, ratio:  68% - 32%.  

 150 cu. m. per quarter:  Base fee: $102.00, user fee: $  260.70, ratio:  28% - 72%.            

 900 cu. m. per quarter:  Base fee: $102.00, user fee: $2038.20, ratio:   5% - 95%   

Does anyone believe that these figures comply with the 50-50 policy established by the Board?  Is it fair that the less water you use the more of your money goes to infrastructure costs? The policy is that half of your fee should go to infrastructure costs and the other half pay for the operation and maintenance of the system.

Another problem is that Industrial, Commercial and Institutional customers pay a lower rate than domestic customers. All customers should be paying the same rate. 

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

Some thoughts about last night's Special Council meeting.

Special meetings called by Council must be posted at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. last night's meeting might have been posted on the bulletin board in the Municipal Hall but it was not posted in advance on the website. With the available technology, Administration should be encouraged to use this technology to inform the public of special meetings.

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

A suggestion to the Prime Minister.

Canada now has a legislated set date for federal elections. However, Prime Minister Steven Harper is ready to pull the plug on the present legislation in advance of the set date. His reason: the opposition parties make it impossible to govern.

Interestingly, the Prime Minister believes that the results of a new election will again produce a minority government.

My question is this: why go into an expensive election process that will produce the same results? Does that make sense to anyone?

Proposed solution: get the Governor General to request an opposition party (i.e. the Liberals) to form a minority government and see if they could govern. If they fail the option of a new election will still be available.

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

How the closing of the Lavington glass plant will affect taxation.

Closing the Lavington glass plant is a major disaster for employees of the plant. Seeing their livelihood disappear is like loosing part of their life and I am truly sorry for them. This is a major problem with foreign ownership where only the money count not the people.

However, the consequences of the plant closure will probably not have as great an effect on the Municipality as some people expect. The zoning of the property will remain Major Industry and will be assessed as such. The value might be reduced somewhat but major industrial sites are very much coveted. Thus, municipal taxes, NORD taxes and school taxes might be somewhat lesser but will not disappear entirely. The sky is falling for the employees but not necessarily for taxes.

I might be able to provide somewhat better information next week when the assessor in charge of industrial assessment will return from his holidays.

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

Council meeting -- June 9, 2008

Some of you may be interested of a major decision made by Council tonight. The enclosed document was the subject of this discussion and decision. Interestingly, during the Public hearing no-one was allowed to discuss the sewer (we were muzzled).

The report is quite technical in nature. Note worthy items are "...in 2004 Council passed a resolution supporting Option 1. Since that time, investments in the new infrastructure have been made on the basis of this option...". What we must remember is that 111% (not a mistake) of those investments were made by the existing sewer users. The only new investment was made by Trintec (private) and that was in Option 2.

SUGOI Developments Ltd, whose proposal was the subject of tonights' Public Hearing, was advised that sewer servicing was to go down aberdeen Road yet it could not be addressed during the Public Hearing. So much for open, honest Council!

Note item 3 on page 3 of the report. "Option 1 provides sewer service to more developable land sooner than Option 2". That is listed as a benefit. I say that is a negative as it will put more pressure of developing agricultural land.

My greatest concern for existing sewer users is the fact that the Kalamalka Road line would have to be upgraded and as usual, existing users would be on the hook for 50% of the cost in advance in the form of reserves to be built up at their expense and sharing the financing costs of the rest of the needed borrowing.

Incidentally, the recommendations on page 6 passed 5-2, Councillors Garlick and Firman voting in the negative.

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

50/50 proposal revisited.

I cannot emphasize enough the unfairness of the proposed 50/50 principle staff is putting forward for Council's approval.

Let me give you some background information.

The Community Charter requires that Councils provide some assistance for new growth. The magnitude of this assist factor is left up to individual Councils. Those Councils craving for growth provide higher assist factor in their policies, those not so keen on growth are less magnanimous. The point here is that if Councils provide a certain growth assistance it is extended to the whole of the community and not just selected segment of the taxpayers.

The proposal by staff singles out existing sewer users to bear the financial burden of developing new sewer additions and replacing old infrastructure. Replacement of the old infrastructure and the expansion of the service is required due to growth. Extending the sewer trunk line from McClounie to Aberdeen Road was strictly demanded by growth. Coldstream Meadows could not proceed if it did not connect to community sewer. The overwhelming majority of the other residences DID NOT connect to the new system.

When Councils expended reserves from the existing sewer utility's account ($665,000 by previous Council and $250,000 by the present Council) they actually forced current sewer customers to assist new growth to the tune of 111%. We paid more for the sewer trunk than what it actually cost!!! If someone thinks that's fair I have a bridge for sale!

If Council insists that we should have a 50% growth assist rate than they must convince all of the taxpayers in Coldstream and must collect this assist rate from all of them. Of course, they should also volunteer to pay up as five of the Councillors are presently not affected by the proposed financial burden.

As I explained in my earlier article, reserves can also be misappropriated by succeeding Councils just as it happened with the reserves we lost.

If Council rejects the 50/50 principle then our sewer rates could be reduced further and would at least partially ease the unfair removal of our sewer reserves. When time comes to replace old infrastructure then we'll borrow the necessary funds and have all those involved in the sewer system pay for the financing as we go forward. We do not need to subsidize unknown future residents with our present hard earned cash.

The Eagle.

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

*******************************************************Council Meeting -- April 14, 2008. ***

REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL
OF THE DISTRICT OF COLDSTREAM

TO BE HELD ON MONDAY, APRIL 14, 2008
IN THE MUNICIPAL HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
9901 KALAMALKA ROAD, COLDSTREAM, BC
AT 7:00 PM

A G E N D A (click)

--------------------------------------------------

Page 227

(3) Policy Re: Sewer Extensions to Serve Existing Neighbourhoods Currently on Septic Service

• Report from the Director of Engineering Services, dated March 26, 2008

Recommendation

THAT the report from the Director of Engineering Services, dated March 26, 2008, regarding Policy Re: Sewer Extensions to Serve Existing Neighbourhoods Currently on Septic Service, be received;

AND THAT future extensions of sewers to existing properties be financed by a percentage share from the utility, the balance between the new property owners, the OBWB and senior government funding when available, with the utility share to be determined by policy;

AND FURTHER THAT new customers fronting on sewer mains be required to hook up within five (5) years and be charged the fixed fee portion of the quarterly sewer utility rate immediately upon sewer main completion to cover intervening maintenance costs.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

This motion is premature. Council is planning to have a meeting where policies regarding sewer extension will be discussed. Issues at this meeting should resolve the conundrum arising from Council's decision that all new customers in Sewered Area 2 should pay 7% of the total infrastructure costs. The conundrum is that Sewered Area 1 customers have already paid their 7%. Any additional contribution to the new construction would mean that they must pay over and above the 7% required by new customers. This is unfair and conflicts with the Charters' policy of fair play to all taxpayers.

Sewered area 1 residents have been overcharged to the tune of nearly $600,000. This represents a sum of nearly $300 per household. We should not be taken advantage by our own Council. Don't you agree?

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

Vandals strike -- By Roger Knox.

According to Al McNiven the vandalism is a regularly occurring problem. Likely this problem exists with other Parks properties.

Would it not make sense to reduce the huge cost of repairing these damages by instituting regular night watch duties during the weekends? The watchman could visit these facilities at regular intervals and ensure that any untoward activities are caught early before they develop into huge expenses.

Just a thought. Could be a good job for someone to calculate cost benefit of the suggestion.

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

Coldstream trashes universal collection -- by Jennifer Smith

Coldstream has thrown an opportunity for universal garbage collection to the curb.

A chance to pick up the service through the North Okanagan Regional District was defeated in a tie vote at Coldstream council Monday.

Only six members of council were available to vote, with Mayor Gary Corner away. Opposition from Couns. Jim Garlick, Glen Taylor and Doug Dirk defeated the option.

The proposed service aims to reduce the amount of garbage that goes to the landfill as well as the number of vehicles hauling by providing the service with a one-bag per week limit (with an option to buy additional bag tags).

Feeling very strongly about the issue, Coun. Mary Malerby pleaded for her colleagues to vote in favour, reminding them that the landfill is filling up quickly.

“We have a responsibility in order to make it last as long as we possibly can,” said Malerby, citing the proposed service as a great way to do so. “When Vernon moved to universal garbage their recycling actually increased.”

But concerns were raised that those who already diligently recycle and produce only a bag or two of garbage a month might feel compelled to do otherwise.

“If you’re allowing everybody to put out a bag of garbage every week then people will say, ‘well, I’m paying for it so I might as well put it out,’” said Coldstream Ratepayers Association president Gyula Kiss, who is also a former member of NORD’s Waste Management Committee.

The proposed cost of universal garbage collection is estimated to be cheaper than service provided by either of the two local companies. Compared to the $27 to $31/quarter currently charged by these companies for one bag a week pickup, the universal program cost would be $21.45 per quarter.

The aim is to split the contract between the two local contractors, if they are willing.

But Taylor fears once that contract is up, the local providers will be pushed out by big business.

“After three or five years you’re going to get the big wheels coming in here and going for that contract and these little guys are going to disappear.”

There is also the concern of administrative costs, as NORD would be fielding all complaint calls, dealing with contractor payments and such.

But Michael Stamhuis, director of engineering services, sees the system as a positive option.

“The benefit I see is essentially cost and efficiency. In my area, for example, there are three houses picked up by one contractor, there are three houses picked up by another and the others who self haul.”

This is the second time the option for universal garbage collection has come up at Coldstream in the past five months. The issue was tabled in November as council sought further information on costs and benefits.

---------------------------------------------------------------

I have said a lot more about the mandatory garbage collection issue at the Council meeting.

I explained that no matter who delivers the garbage, once it produced it has to go to the landfill site one way or the other. The best way to control garbage is at the site of production. Senior Governments should act to control the production of garbage at the manufacturing end.

For example, styrofoam is one of the worst offenders. It is very light yet it takes up huge volumes of the landfill site. It is not recycled yet huge amounts are produced to package all sorts of products.

I also suggested that private contractors would be just as willing to charge for extra bags as those working for NORD if requested by bylaws.

Those of us producing very small amounts of garbage should be allowed to deliver our own products to the landfill site at a fraction of the cost of the mandatory collection.

Individuals hiring their own haulers (one of two) will also avoid problems garbage strikes create. We are all aware of periodic strikes and their consequences in our major cities.

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

Articles from the Morning Star -- March 28, 2008

Greater Vernon Water, as we know it, will be relegated to a memory. All that remains is the fight over the assets and trying to determine who gets what from the reserves built up from our outrageous water rates.

Let's refresh our memories of what was achieved by this memorable service according to the latest information presented:

A new balancing reservoir was built on the East Hill (McMechan Reservoir) - cost: $4.5 million;

A new water treatment plant was built on Reservoir Road for about $6.0 million;

The Kalamalka Lake Pump Station was upgraded for about $0.7 million;

A new sewer line was built to the Rise and Bella Vista for about $4.0 million

Preliminary work on Duteau Creek Water Treatment Plant about $2.0 million.

Judge for yourself how much benefit you received from the actions of GVW besides the privilege of paying .

----------------------------------------------------

We found some extra money!!!!

Despite the passionate claims of Councillor Malerby, that Council has turned every stone and could not find ways of reducing the proposed tax increases a further check revealed that indeed there were some cash hidden in the cracks and crannies.

We may wonder if these extra funds would have been discovered had the Ratepayers Association not raised the issue repeatedly. We may never know but the lingering possibility remains!

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

Council meeting -- March 25, 2008 -- Notes.

REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL
OF THE DISTRICT OF COLDSTREAM

TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, MARCH 25, 2008
IN THE MUNICIPAL HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
9901 KALAMALKA ROAD, COLDSTREAM, BC AT 7:00 PM

A G E N D A

1. DELEGATIONS

a. Request for Special Burning Permit 9242 Kalamalka Road (Miciuk) Ron Miciuk will be in attendance to speak to his letter.

b. Request for Special Burning Permit 7080 and 7060 Brewer Road (DeLeenheer) Irene and Greg DeLeenheer may be in attendance to speak to their letter.

c. Request for Special Burning Permit 10108 Venables Drive (Lowen) Helmi Lowen may be in attendance to speak to her letter.

d. Multiple Family Sewer Rates and 2008 Budget Mr. John Hegler will be in attendance to speak to this matter.

2. PUBLIC OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS COUNCIL (Total Time Allotted: 10 Minutes)

NOTE: This time is to afford members of the public the opportunity to address issues on the agenda dated, March 25, 2008. Issues that are not on the current agenda will not be heard by Council.

If you have items to address that are not contained in this agenda, please contact the Municipal Clerk to make a formal request to appear as a delegation at a future meeting of Council.

3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

.....................................

5. REPORT OF THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER

(2) Universal Curbside Garbage Collection Services

• Report from the Director of Engineering Services, dated March 11, 2008

Recommendation

THAT the report from the Director of Engineering Services, dated March 11, 2008, regarding Universal Curbside Garbage Collection Services, be received;

AND THAT the District, in conjunction with the Regional District of North Okanagan, move to implement a universal curbside garbage collection system wherein a weekly collection service would be provided, such service having a one bag limit plus tags, with an interim two bag limit for a three to six month initiation period.

click on for more

-----------------------------------------------------------

I am sure Council's intentions are honourable and they hope to do the best for the community and reduce the amount of waste delivered to the transfer station. However, the approach is wrong and provides little or no incentive to reduce waste production.

As a former member of NORD's Waste Management Committee (six years on the Committee, three of those as Chair) I have been involved in many discussions on the subject of waste reduction. The general consensus was that the user pay system provides the greatest incentive for reduction.

The landfill is owned and operated by NORD. We all pay for it. That is the only fixed infrastructure needed for the service. The only question remains how the garbage is delivered there. Garbage delivery is not like water or sewer service where fixed infrastructure is required for the service delivery by local governments.

Presently the service is provided by individual contractors who pick up the trash and deliver it to the landfill. They set their rate based on the number of bags they pick up from any given household. It could be regulated by NORD to instruct contractors to charge by the number of bags using tags on each bag. That would be an incentive to reduce garbage production.

Many home owners deliver their own trash to the landfill. They pay by the bag or by weight if the load is over a certain limit. These customers generally have very low volume of garbage (one or two bags per month).

The proposal by Coldstream is to have a predetermined contractor do the job for everybody. I assume, as usual, Coldstream will administer the service for NORD. That is two administrative steps.

This service is delivered by independent businesses. Why should we interfere with businesses when they are working well, making a living, providing excellent service and allow those wishing to do the service for themselves to do so?

I do not believe that the electorate is urging Council to take over the service. I am quite sure that the service would not be cheaper. The one bag limit is still not much incentive to reduce beyond the one bag per week garbage production. The attitude will be: if I am charged for a full bag regardless of what I put to the curb I might as well get my money's worth and be less careful. However, if Council believes that there is great support for the proposal, they should initiate a public input session to gage the desires of the public.

The present system is a good insurance against the effects of a potential strike. As long as we can deliver our own trash to the landfill site we can continue doing it even if some contractors decide to strike.

Since the system is not broken I don't think Council should "fix it" because chances are after their intervention it might become permanently broken.

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

Morning Star News -- Eagle's commentary

The dire warning coming more and more frequently from scientists seem to have little effect on the rapid development throughout the Okanagan. The rabid growth continues with a devil-may-care attitude.

We cannot blame the developers: they do what developers are supposed to do, try to make as much profit as possible. The politicians are the ones who are supposed to ensure that the taxpayers they represent are protected and their quality of life preserved. The taxpayers of the communities collectively decide how their communities are developed in the Official Community Plans. Once those plans are approved local governments are supposed to ensure that those goals, expressed in the plans, are carried out fairly and equitably.

Developers are just another segment of the taxpayers. They should be treated fairly but favoured over the interests of the rest of the population. They must obey the bylaws, policies and regulations set down by Councils. If those bylaws, policies and regulations are followed Councils do not have to even see the developers: staff can deal with the enforcements.

One major problem is that in order to make informed decisions politicians must have adequate data available with regards to water availability, air quality and the like. Unfortunately, those data are scarce and even when something like this water report becomes available it is treated with skepticism by those favouring development.

It is up to the taxpayers to voice their opinion because as long as remain silent politicians interpret that as tacit support. So let your opinion heard by your elected officials.

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

Reader's question-answer.

Question: why could we not just carry on with the present financing model as it is and borrow instead for the replacement of the lift stations?

Answer: while this sounds like a good idea there are financial consequences. However, if we continue with the present financial model any borrowing will necessitate either a tax increase or an additional sewer rate increase to cover the cost of borrowing. Using the proposed model the present rate covers the borrowing. No increase in taxes nor in rates need to be considered. The refurbished reserves would cover the necessary upgrades to infrastructure and maintain services.

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

Morning Star News -- Wesbild announcement surprises.

It appears that Greater Vernon Services do a lot of "erroring".

They "errored" when they wrote to the Agricultural Land Commission requesting the change of use for the Spicer Block.

They "errored" when they designed Master Water Plan #1. They "errored" when they designed MWP #2. They "errored"on the design and cost calculations for the Duteau Creek water treatment plant.

Now, to err is human, but to keep making error after error which is placing increasing burden on our finances is unforgivable. "We were trying to put this (agreement) together quickly and we errored" stated the Chair of GVSC. Perhaps taking the time planning our moves would save us some money on the long run and also ensure that plans are done properly. Should we try it?

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

Vernon vies for voice in governance report -- Richard Rolke -- Morning Star.

A substantial rift could be developing over the valley-wide governance process.

The City of Vernon wants the mayors of Vernon, Kelowna, Westside and Penticton to submit their own report to Community Services Minister Ida Chong because it has little faith that the governance task force’s report will actually reflect the views of the four large cities.

“I don’t want us to come across as bullies but we need to look after our taxpayers,” said Mayor Wayne Lippert.

The city’s primary concern is that the task force’s draft report will be authored by the chief administrative officers of the three existing regional districts and a ministry representative.

Coun. Juliette Cunningham questions whether employees of the regional districts can objectively look at other governance models.

“They are in a conflict. At our North Okanagan Regional District table, that CAO wants to preserve the status quo,” she said.

Lippert goes on to say that Central Okanagan Regional District’s administrator is retiring and the Okanagan-Similkameen Regional District has an interim administrator.

“I am not sure if the depth is there to put a good report together,” he said.

The perception of Vernon council is the task force’s report may only reflect the view of electoral areas and small municipalities.

“We need to separate ourselves from this report. I don’t know how we can represent our taxpayers if anything remotely close to status quo remains,” said Coun. Pat Cochrane.

Coun. Barry Beardsell insists the four largest cities have not had a chance to put forward their views.

“This whole thing has been manipulated from a regional perspective,” he said.

Most members of Vernon council favour a single regional district for the entire Okanagan Valley.

Cochrane was among the most vocal to support the four cities taking a united position.

“Their report would represent 80 per cent of the population in the area. At some point, the majority must have its say,” he said.

But the governance task force’s vice-chairman disputes the City of Vernon’s concerns.

“There is nothing preventing any separate segment of the region from providing input. But to suggest our employees are not capable of putting forward an unbiased report is not correct,” said Jerry Oglow, NORD chairman and Armstrong mayor.

“What it (task force report) looks like, what it says is presumptuous on the City of Vernon’s part. I believe the CAOs and the ministry representative will collate the facts and simply outline what the consensus is of the majority of people who provided input during the process.”

And while the CAOs will develop the draft report, Oglow points out that the task force — made up of elected officials — will have the final say on its content.

--------------------------------------------
I find it amazing. Here is a Council that craves for a valley wide, single regional district yet they have difficulty with NORD because they are not in control. In NORD they have 23% of the total membership and over 41% of the financial voting power. They would have much reduced power in a valley wide organization where Kelowna would be dictating the agenda. I am quite sure they would be very unhappy in a valley wide regional district.

Vernon Councils always preached cooperation. Unfortunately, their definition of cooperation was: do as I wish to achieve the Nirvana of cooperation otherwise you are considered uncooperative.

I have no objection of Vernon Council dictating to their own citizenry (obviously Vernon taxpayers sometimes do as demonstrated by the recent referendum result). However, every community that elected its own government and regional representative have their right to determine the direction their community wishes to go. If they are willing to pay for their government their future should be in their own hand.

The statement that NORD staff are in a conflict is absurd, they are no more in conflict then Councillor Cunningham. NORD staff represent the area outside Vernon, Councillor Cunningham represents (hopefully!) the taxpayers of Vernon.

No matter what happens conflicts will not end!

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

Council meeting -- February 11, 2008 -- Notes.

Last night's Council meeting was a short one with little mostly day-to-day Council stuff. I found one unique issue of interest brought up by Councillor Mallerby. She attended the "super council meeting" in Kelowna hosted by the all mighty Ida Chong.

Councillor Malerby was quite taken by the idea of creating a valley wide single regional district. Of course, I still remember the enthusiasm Councillor Malerby showed for the Master Water Plan shortly after her election to Council. She provided a Power Point presentation to members of the Ratepayers Association explaining how wonderful the plan was. Unfortunately, the reality turned out differently as the MWP is now in limbo.

Since I did not attend the meeting I am at a disadvantage when debating the issue. However, I know that any time a larger entity incorporates a smaller one it is generally the smaller entity that will draw the short stick. Observe the MWP. While we all paid dearly for our water the ONLY beneficiary to date is Vernon. Vernon, having achieved its goals, is now in the process of trying to partially withdraw from Greater Vernon Water.

It is reasonable to assume that the center of the new super region would be located in Kelowna. The Central Okanagan Regional District was gutted by the creation of Westside. The large bureaucracy must be reassigned to new ventures. It's natural to provide them new employment as the bureaucrats of this new super region.

So how would this new super organization treat little old Coldstream, Lumby or Cherryville? Would they even know where they were, what they were doing? The answer is quite obvious. They would be very low on the list of importance. Thus, it is a mystery to me why a Councillor we elected would be so quick to sign on to something that might be quite inferior to our present system.

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

More cash from the Cash Cows?

The following information was copied from the Vernon Blog. This is important information for Coldstream taxpayers as well.

Our politicians think that we can pay for the financing of the present financing of the Multiplex and the Theatre and also start financing the replacement of those same facilities sometime in the distant future. This is asinine. Most people are concerned with existing taxes they do not want to start paying for facilities to be built in the distant future. When those facilities are needed they should borrow the funds and pay as you go. Any time a slush fund is built up there is the danger of some bureaucrats or politicians cast their beady eyes on it and use it for purposes of their own. Just remember the sewer fund grab by the 2005 Council. If you do not wish to spend your taxes on such slush fund make sure you let your Council know about it. While it is GVSC that is doing the deed that GVSC is composed of City and Coldstream Council members with two additional members from Electoral Areas "B" and "C".

----------------------------------------

JUSTIFY this policy on RESERVES to the Taxpayer.

"First the Regional District looks forward to receiving input from you in the financial planning process. With regards to any discussion of the issue of reserves in-camera, outside of specific legal, labour and/or land issues that may have an impact on the financial plan all budget discussions take place in open meetings.

As for the reserve balances for both the Multiplex and Community Theatre, the net transfers to reserves for 2008 are $78,143 and $96,101 with anticipated 2008 year end balances of $646,728 and $353, 388 respectively. The five year plan assumes a growth factor of 3.92% a year and assuming that this occurs at the end of five years the reserves will accumulate to $2,662,935 and $1,327,590 respectively. The plan however does not currently include life cycle costs for both facilities which are currently in the process of determining. Once staff has these costs we will be reviewing the reserve balances again.

Again I look forward to your input into next year’s financial plan."
-----------------------
I received the above details from Mr Harris the CFO of NORD in a most timely fashion. They were given in response to my e-mail of the same day to the following questions:

1. The expected 2008 reserve balance for the Multiplex will be $ $376,461 of which $145,574 will come from this years budgeted transfer into reserves?

2. This does not include a further 2007 unaudited surplus of $435,840. (budget $204,974) which will be added to this 2008 reserve balance when confirmed?

3. The 2017 target for reserves in the Multiplex Account is $6,992,874 ?

4. The expected 2008 reserve balance for the Performing Arts will be $ $316,917 of which $107,721 will come from this years budgeted transfer into reserves?

5. This does not include a further 2007 unaudited surplus of $46,491 (budget $20,888) which will be added to this 2008 reserve balance when confirmed?

6. The 2017 target for reserves in the Performing Arts Account is $3,421,356?
-----------------------
Don Quixote Note: It is too late this year for the public to have any effective input on this budget as it was passed at last Wednesday's NORD meeting.

Effectively it confirms the planned 2008 ending reserve totals of $646,728 for the Multiplex with a 5 year target of $2,662,935. (The operating costs in year 5 or 2012 is projected to be $1,525,931. The 5 year reserve will form 174% of that years operating costs.)

Similarly the Community Theatre is confirmed at the planned 2008 ending reserve totals of $353, 388 with a 5 year target of $1,327,590. (The operating costs in year 5 or 2012 is projected to be $290,028. The 5 year reserve will form 457% of that years operating costs.)
--------------------
The staff at NORD has presented a way of building up reserves in these two buildings on the current taxpayers dime and I have yet to hear from one Politician that sits at this table either what they will be used for or that they agree with this form of taxation. There is now indications of revisiting this budget for 'life cycle costs for both facilities' which may or may not be an euphemism for further upward revisions.

I expect these Politicians to stand up in their respective open Council meetings and explain why these large yearly tax burdens have been accepted and the full reasons for these reserves and their planned use.

Vernon's taxes at NORD are increasing by 6% or $513,344 in 2008. The reserve policy as voted on by your representatives at GVSV and NORD is a major part of that increase. JUSTIFY this policy on RESERVES to the Taxpayer.

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

Thank you Andy!

It is with regret to inform members of the Coldstream Ratepayers Association that Andy Danyliu has resigned as President of the Association for personal reasons. His dedication to the Coldstream Ratepayers Association will be missed by all. Hopefully, as the Past President he will continue to participate in the activities of the Association. Thank you Andy! You have done a magnificent job! We should continue our periodic coffee meetings to discuss the local political issues and shoot the breeze.

As the Vice President, yours truly will take over the position until such time as we find suitable volunteers who will be willing to stand for election. So, if anyone has any issues to discuss, feel free to contact me either by phone (545-8772) or by email (see top of this blog). I will continue to provide information through these pages and will publish emails as long as they are topical and non libelous. Keep them comments coming!

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

Vernon Opts Out -- Betty Selin - Astral Media Radio News

The City of Vernon has given the Ministry of Community Services half a dozen reasons why they want out of Greater Vernon Water. Mayor Wayne Lippert says until the Ministry of Community Services responds, the city expects to continue to stay involved. The city says attempts to resolve water utility issues have been dragging on for over a year and a half, and there is a lack of accountability to city water customers.Lippert says he's hopeful they'll be able to get things back on target.
-------------------------------------
Now that Vernon got everything they wanted and the rest of the partners got nothing, they grab their ball and quit the game. Lovely!

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

Multiplex taps into bar idea -- By Richard Rolke, February 22

Major changes are being proposed for the Multiplex.

Staff presented a list of operational and facility upgrades Thursday to the Greater Vernon Services Committee.

“Many of these things are initiated already and in various stages of development,” said Brian Fry, arenas manager.

Among the most high-profile suggestions is turning the Grand Room into a sports bar/restaurant.

“It would be a go-to place in the community,” said Fry, who envisions the bar being open seven days a week.

Fry would like to work with an architect to transform the space at the north end of the Multiplex into a bar with a patio, viewing area and sound, as well as a catering kitchen and a walk-in cooler.

Fry’s list also includes strengthening the relationship with promoters, providing more staff for cleaning the Multiplex, purchasing equipment to improve maintenance, building a lunch room for staff and evaluating how event tickets are sold.

He also recommends introducing an ice allocation policy that restricts the amount of ice time a seasonal customer can return to be not more than five per cent of their annual reservation package.

Fry said there has been a problem with some organizations blocking large chunks of time at the beginning of the season but not using it all.

“We want to create some room for more people to get into the building.”

The current 14-day return policy for adult sports groups could be extended to 30 days so there is more time to find new tenants, while lower rental rates may be introduced to encourage groups to use the Multiplex late at night.

“We want to find room for new customers,” said Fry.

Most of the items on Fry’s update list have not been budgeted for, and no action was taken by the GVSC board Thursday.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Next innovation should be the introduction of Keno or Bingo so people, bored during the game, could entertain themselves by gambling.

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