Councillor Taylor responds.

Gyula

I will not be attending your meeting as I have other commitments, but I would welcome anyone wishing further information regarding fire department operations to call me at 542-7831 Bus or 549-0110 Cell.

I would be happy to talk about the generals issues regarding the fire department. I see no change in the operations and the department is business as usual with no financial implications to the tax payers. However any discussions regarding Mr. Lecavalier's dismissal is a personnel matter and I will not be making any comments.

Regards

Glen Taylor

ps. you may read this out at the meeting and anyone wishing further information can call me.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

It would be interesting to know whether Councillor Taylor had a talk with the members of thew Fire Department and knows first hand that it "is business as usual with no financial implications to the tax payers." My personal information seems to contradict that statement. I hope Councillor Taylor is right or we might look at some big expenses!

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

An ingenious way to reveal Council's in-camera voting pattern.

The Community Charter provides a wide array of issues that could be discussed in-camera. Councillors who do not want to have their opinions revealed to the public on controversial issues prefer in-camera sessions where their opinion can remain private.

That said, there is no reason to keep the result of the voting secret. There is no damage to the public by revealing how an individual member voted. Regardless, Councils like to keep the electorate guessing especially on issues that are controversial and their vote might reduce their chances of re-election.

There is a legal option to force the hands of reluctant Councillors.

A member of Council who voted in the negative can make a motion in an open meeting to release the voting results of an in-camera decision. This motion will require action by the rest of Council.

If the motion is NOT seconded, then chances are that the council members in attendance all voted in support of the in-camera issue. If there is a seconder then one can safely assume that those voting against the release of the voting results have voted in favour of the issue and those supporting the release were voting in the negative. Thus, the voting results become public indirectly.

This is all legal! If Councillor Firman follows through with his promise to bring forth the issue he will be forcing Council to reveal their secret one way or another.

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

Councillor Dirk responds to invite.

My oldest son is getting married on Saturday and Thursday night we're having family pictures taken so I'm not able to attend. Thanks for the invite. I have no problem speaking on general issues around Fire Services but won't be speaking about any specifics of Leo's dismissal as I have been advised by legal counsel that if I comment on in-camera business I will be liable to legal action. You can read this out at the meeting.

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

Readers write.

As a former fire Chief in Lavington I have to agree with the comments attributed to Tony Metz. During my tenure I found both Council and the administration at that time less than supportive. We had to fight for basic injury insurance. Getting a budget approved for needed equipment was a constant battle. Lavington (where the main industrial base is located was treated as very second class) and only through constant appearances by myself was I able to obtain a larger budget to meet the community needs. Council should show more appreciation and understanding of the volunteer role, particularly when considering tax savings to the municipality.

Alan Birtles

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

A note from Councillor Jim Garlick

I am away and will not be able to attend the planned meeting at the WI hall. If anyone has any questions regarding the firing of the fire chief, please contact me by email:

jimgarlick@msn.com

I will try and answer anything I can. Unfortunately, the in-camera nature of this issue ties my hands on what I am able to reveal.

Thanks

Jim Garlick
Councillor
District of Coldstream
9901 Kalamalka Road, Coldstream, BC V1B 1L6
Email jimgarlick@msn.com

Council’s actions draw sharp rebuke -- by Jennifer Smith

Published: August 15, 2008 4:00 PM
Updated: August 16, 2008 8:37 PM

With the recent firing of Coldstream fire chief Leo Lecavalier, a fellow retired comrade is appalled at the control the municipality has over the department.

Former Lavington Fire Department chief Tony Metz says Lecavalier’s dismissal has hit not only the existing fire fighting community hard, but also the retired members.

“It definitely doesn’t sit well with retired members and so forth with the democratic process of electing members into the hall,” said Metz, who served as chief of the Lavington department for 15 years.

Lecavalier was dismissed from the Coldstream Fire Department by the District of Coldstream, effective Aug. 1.

While the chief and all member positions in the volunteer hall are approved by council, Metz says the dismissal goes against the democracy of firefighters voting members and chiefs in.

“That’s unheard of,” said Metz, who retired from his hall in 2003. “It kind of goes against the constitution.”

Not only is the chief’s dismissal troubling, but the fact that Lecavalier can’t even serve as a regular member is absurd, said Metz.

But Coldstream Mayor Gary Corner says council has the same approval rights over chiefs as it does over department members.

Which is why firefighters at the Coldstream department are saying very little over the situation, for fear of losing their own volunteer positions.

“They want to stay here, they’ve been here for a long time,” said deputy chief Lawrie Skolrood.

Aside from information passed down from Skolrood, firefighters say they have yet to see a member from council or a district staff member come to discuss the situation with them or explain their reasoning.

Corner hasn’t been asked by firefighters to discuss Lecavalier’s firing with them, but he hasn’t ruled that possibility out.

“I am quite willing if they want to, to meet with them.”

However, Corner doesn’t foresee the municipality releasing any details on the issue to the public.

“Any staff issues remain private to protect the actual employee.”

Contrarily, Coun. Bill Firman feels the public should have some insight into the situation.

“When I get back to council I’m going to make a motion in front of council to disclose how everyone voted (at the in-camera meeting to dismiss Lecavalier),” said Firman.

Although that won’t be for awhile since council’s next scheduled meeting isn’t until Sept. 8.

Meanwhile, the Coldstream department of 25 members is trying to operate with the loss of their leader and taking on the extra workload.

They do say that without Lecavalier, who knew the rules and routines, some firefighting operations are proving to be difficult.

One such challenge includes finalizing the ordering of the hall’s two new trucks, something Lecavalier had been working on and knew what was needed, budgets and every detail of.

The time and effort Lecavalier put into that project is just one example of his dedication to the department, said Metz.

Having joined the department in 1972, when the Lavington hall first opened, Metz served alongside Lecavalier.

“Since he’s been chief he’s one of the main reasons responsible for the training centre, he’s spent countless hours on programs for the training centre...”

Metz adds, that as a chief, Lecavalier stood up for his department’s wishes.

“The chief is a liaison person between your members and council. Right or wrong, you’re going to battle for what they want,” said Metz.

Therefore when it comes to why Lecavalier was dismissed, Metz said it’s obviously not a case of the membership being unhappy with how the hall is being run.

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

Public meeting called over firing of chief -- by Jennifer Smith

Published: August 15, 2008 4:00 PM
Updated: August 16, 2008 8:34 PM

The entire community of Coldstream is being called to show its support for their recently fired fire chief – Leo Lecavalier.

The Coldstream Ratepayers’ Association has called a town hall meeting at the Coldstream Women’s Institute Hall Thursday from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. All members of the public are invited to attend.

“We want to rally for the fire chief,” said CRA president Gyula Kiss.

“Apparently the firemen are 100 per cent supportive of the fire chief, both here and in Lavington.”

It’s hoped residents will rally together to call on council’s decision to dismiss the volunteer chief, who was just shy of his 25-year service mark.

Coldstream council canned the chief Aug. 1, but it has yet to release any public information behind its reasoning.

The firing comes less than a month after Lecavalier publicly expressed dismay with how the building of the department’s new fire hall was handled – specifically communication issues.

Although it’s not clear if his concerns spurred his dismissal, Kiss says council shouldn’t fire someone just because of a difference of opinion.

Lecavalier has not only been dismissed as fire chief but he also cannot be a regular member.

Kiss is appalled that council can or would revoke Lecavalier’s right to volunteer.

Mayor Gary Corner has stated that this is a staffing issue, as Lecavalier is considered a member of Coldstream staff.

“It’s a very crowded issue here,” said Kiss.

“On the one hand they consider him a staff member but he doesn’t get the protection a regular staff member does.”

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

Mayor just doesn't get it

Published: August 15, 2008 4:00 PM
Updated: August 16, 2008 8:41 PM

It's increasingly obvious that Coldstream Mayor Gary Corner doesn't understand the severity of firing the community's volunteer fire chief.

Corner has stated that he's more than willing to discuss the matter with the firefighters if he is asked to, but why is he putting the onus on them? It was Corner and his council that dismissed Leo Lecavalier as chief, a position he was elected to by the rank-and-file membership. It should be Corner and his council going to the department and explaining why the decision was made.

Corner also likes to point out that staffing is handled by the chief administrative officer, but it was a decision of council to fire Lecavalier. Politicians can't walk away from something they are ultimately responsible for.

Corner also doesn't expect the municipality to provide any details on the dismissal to the public because personnel matters are confidential under provincial legislation. But while that may be true, it's convenient to hide behind the rules when you know your actions have caused a lot of harm and upset people.

On the other hand, Coun. Bill Firman is showing leadership when he says he will make a motion to disclose how individual council members voted on firing Lecavalier. One would hope the rest of council will support Firman in his attempt to shed some light on the secretive, back-room issue.

What may ultimately get council to provide some transparency is public pressure, and that is expected to begin Thursday when the Coldstream Ratepayers Association holds a town hall meeting on Lecavalier's dismissal.

We would encourage Corner and the rest of council to attend the meeting and hear directly from those they represent.

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

Have the firemen really been informed by the Administrator?

By Peter McIntyre

Coldstream's mayor says he'd be willing to meet with the District's firefighters to discuss the recent dismissal of the department's fire chief.

Leo Lecavalier was let go earlier this month, but the reasons have not been released publicly.

Mayor Gary Corner says District administrator Wendy Kay has already met with the firefighters who were upset by the firing.

"If they want to meet with me, I'd be quite willing to do it but really it is a staff issue. It's one of Wendy's employees as far as who looks after the staff."

Corner is not aware of the District receiving a number of letters from residents upset about the dismissal and says he hasn't received any phone calls about it.

Meantime, Corner says there's been some delays on Coldstream's new firehall, but it's expected to open sometime this month.

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

The above report implies that Coldstream's Administrator actually met with the firemen regarding the firing of their chief.

This is false. I have made inquiries and my information is that she has not met with them. It is also interesting that the firemen have been cautioned about talking to anyone about these issues.

I was under the impression that we are living in a free country. The volunteer firemen are also taxpayers of Coldstream and they should be able to express their views on how the Municipality is governed. Those are basic Human Rights. Volunteer firefighters are not actual employees, they receive an honorarium for their volunteer services.

The Mayor considers this as being a staff issue. Volunteer firemen have a constitution approved by Council. It is possible that Council can fire a Chief but it is questionable wether they can fire a volunteer without cause.

These are issues that need to be aired. Mayor Corner said that he would be willing to meet with the District's firefighters. The Townhall meeting on August 21 at the Coldstream Woman's Institute Hall at 7:00PM would be an excellent opportunity for him to meet with the firefighters and with other Coldstream residents and inform them of the facts.

The firemen will be invited to the meeting. Invitation is also extended to all Councillors. We hope they'll come and meet with their constituents. Special invitation is extended to the Administrator so she could talk to her ultimate employers, the residents of Coldstream.

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

Attention, Coldstream residents!

Council's decision to fire Leo Lecavalier, our Fire Chief, after nearly 25 years of meritorious service could have major consequences for the taxpayers of Coldstream.

We do not need to create unnecessary upheavals in the ranks of our volunteer firemen. Council needs to explain their reasons for this action.

We have an efficient group of firemen providing excellent, cost effective fire protection. Our fire insurances are reasonable and the cost of service is minimal compared to that provided by professional fire fighters elsewhere.

We are holding a special meeting on Thursday,

August 21 at 7:00PM in the Coldstream Woman's

Institute Hall where Council will have the

opportunity to explain their actions. All Coldstream

Residents are encouraged to attend and support

our Fire Chief.

Mayor Corner was quoted as saying:

"If they want to meet with me, I'd be quite willing to do it but really it is a staff issue. It's one of Wendy's employees as far as who looks after the staff."

Wendy is actually an employee of Council and indirectly of Coldstream taxpayers. If her actions, sanctioned by Council, create strife among a large group of volunteers then taxpayers deserve an explanation. What is there to hide?

We invite the Mayor, members of Council and the Administrator to our Town Hall meeting to provide them with an opportunity to answer our questions. We also extend our invitation to members of the volunteer fire department so the Mayor may have the opportunity to speak to them in public.

Please come along and bring your friends and neighbours and support the volunteer firemen!

Hope to see you there.

Gyula Kiss
Pres., CRPA

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

Selected articles MS -- 2008-08-15

While I agree that sprinkling regulations should be observed by I believe there is more abuse created by the Water Authority which charges exorbitant water rates for basically untreated water. As for the water supply: I hate to think what restrictions will be applied once all the developments presently in progress will have residents clamoring for water!

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

We should be grateful for the protection we receive from our various fire protection agencies, including the Coldstream and Lavington Fire Departments. Administration should consider the consequences of alienating our volunteers!

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

Fire behind Kal Store.

There was a wild fire at the north end of Kalamalka Lake this afternoon underscoring the need to be very careful with fire and the need to appreciate our firefighters.

Following are a few photos of the fire and the mop up operations.

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

Selected articles MS -- 2008-08-13

No commentary needed!


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

How ridiculous!
It was the City that initiated the devolution of water distribution.

GVSC has operated as a Committee for about a year now. It was the corporate body of NORD that established GVSC by a specific bylaw. The decision was not restricted to the participants alone. Therefore, it is the corporate body's responsibility to repeal the bylaw that gave authority to GVSC.

Councillor Beardsell should know how committees operate within NORD as he has been around long enough. He should find an orphanage and have a rest there. The Committee is a lot fairer than the system where seven participants were acting as the entire Board. Suck it up Councillor! to

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

Richard Rolke is right on. The only thing to add is the timing of the firing. Council is on summer holidays now and don't expect to meet till September 8. This was probably done by design to avoid delegations protesting their action. It was not a nice thing but who would ever accuse Mayor Corner and his group of being nice?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is a lot of truth in this article, it's worth reading. He definitely is not an idiot.

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

Readers write -- The Tyranny of the Dimwitted

Readers of this blog may find some comfort knowing that they are trying to stay informed about local political issues whilst the vast majority of Coldstream residents will remain woefully ignorant and unconcerned about the issues that plague us right up to and into the polling booth.

That is, if they even bother to vote in municipal elections. Unfortunately, as excerpts from the article below indicate, the preferences of thoughtful, responsible and informed voters are invariably swamped by the uninformed with a decidedly unfavorable net result to everybody.

That is how I have, in previous comments to this blog, tried to account for that bad policy decisions enacted by Coldstream councilors, over the last 6 years. The Coldstream electorate has simply made poor choices in whom they entrusted the affairs of the community.

Moreover, certain people on council, past and present, have hijacked the municipal agenda in favor of their own interests and/or the vested interests of a select minority. The scandalous handling of the Coldstream Meadows development, the attempt to remove the Spicer block from the ALR to build a sports complex and now the sewer extension along Aberdeen Road are the most egregious examples that come to mind.

Council has made fools of the whole community who are now left with paying exorbitant taxes on ill advised projects. I very much doubt Caplan's view that the votes of ill informed voters will cancel each other out, leaving the outcome to be decided by a minority of informed voters. I very much fear history will repeat itself next November, leaving us prey to a “tyranny of the dimwitted”, resulting in the election of yet another bad lot of councilors.

Peter Peto

P.S. The recent firing of the Fire Chief by city hall is disgraceful regardless of the reasons. City Hall is out of control, it needs a drastic overhaul. Too many overpaid administrators pushing their weight around for my tastes. the ranks at city hall need to be thinned out and cut down to size!

NEIL REYNOLDS: News from The Globe and Mail Wednesday, August 06, 2008

The Tyranny of the Dimwitted [excerpts]

Bryan Caplan, professor of economics at George Mason University in Washington, cites this famous anecdote in The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies, a brilliant and disturbing analysis of decision making by electorates that - he documents - are perversely ignorant and woefully misinformed.

"These low knowledge levels have been stable since the dawn of polling," he says, "and international comparisons reveal that Americans' overall political knowledge is no more than moderately below average."

In these circumstances, what reason exists to think that these same voters cast rational ballots on highly complicated public policy issues - such as (for example) global warming? A great deal of orthodox economic theory assumes that people vote rationally and in their own best self-interest. Mr. Caplan responds: There is no good reason whatsoever to think that people vote rationally. For whatever reasons, he says, electorates are remarkably dimwitted when it comes to public policy decisions.

"Democracies frequently adopt and maintain policies harmful for most people,"

Mr. Caplan does provide a comforting mathematical analysis. In one limited sense, it doesn't matter that electorates are dumb. By random chance, one deluded person cancels the vote of an oppositely deluded person - leaving the ultimate electoral decision to a very small minority of informed voters. But the central puzzle remains: Why do people vote so often for policies that harm them?

Mr. Caplan's answer, in part, is that people delegate their voting to the "mindset" they possess, a collection of religious beliefs, nationalistic instincts and political impulses that embodies biases and preferences of all kinds. Thus equipped, people don't feel any particular need for extraneous facts. Democracy, though, impartially imposes an economic penalty on everyone - rich and poor alike - when majorities of voters make irrational policy decisions.

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

REVISED PUBLIC SERVICE EXECUTIVE PAY FRAMEWORK

VICTORIA - The Province has revised its compensation framework for executive level employees of the professional BC Public Service to bring B.C. more in line with other jurisdictions across Canada.

Like most employers in Canada, the BC Public Service faces significant challenges due to an aging workforce. The challenge is greatest at the executive level. Forecasts show that within 10 years over 65 per cent of assistant deputy ministers and 51 per cent of deputy ministers will retire. A careful examination of the senior public service labour market across the country demonstrates that executive compensation in British Columbia is not keeping pace. Changes are needed to maintain B.C.'s competitiveness in recruiting and retaining the talent necessary to lead the public service.

A comparison of current compensation levels of public service jurisdictions across Canada shows that B.C. ranks 10th for assistant deputy minister compensation and sixth for deputy minister compensation. The new framework will place the BC Public Service third among the provinces and the federal government. Deputy minister compensation will be set at 83 per cent of federal salaries, as it was prior to 2006, and will be subject to the same regular review cycle to ensure ongoing competitiveness.

Effective Aug. 1, 2008, the maximum payable salary to deputy ministers increased from $221,760 to $299,215 and from $243,936 to $348,600 for the deputy minister to the Premier. The maximum achievable salary for assistant deputy ministers increased from $160,000 to $195,000. The salary holdback component, which is based on specific performance measures linked to leadership on building the corporate human resources of the Province, will increase from five per cent of salary to 10 per cent of salary for both deputy ministers and assistant deputy ministers.

In 2006, the Province released the first Corporate Human Resource Plan for the BC Public Service, setting out an ambitious agenda to increase the competitiveness of B.C.'s professional public service as an employer to ensure it is able to attract and retain the skilled people needed to deliver services to British Columbians. More information on that plan and employment opportunities with the BC Public Service is available at www.employment.gov.bc.ca.

Posted by Sean Holman at 11:46 AM

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

When was the last time you received a wage increase? What percentage did you get? Was it 5%? That would have been considered a big increase.

To put in perspective: the increase the Premier's Deputy Minister got is greater than what an average person would get over 30 years' of working. An interesting concept: a "Civil Servant" getting more than 30 times as much increase in one year as the people she serves get in 30 years of toiling.

The argument for these increases, as usual, " we must be competitive to attract the quality of "executives" we need. Judging from the decisions coming up from Victoria it seems we can't get the quality of people even at these wages.

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

Comment from an Anonymous raeder -- re: water.

Anonymous said...

Hello,

Re: "inform us of the progress (or lack of such) of the MWP"

Earlier this year, an update of the Master Water Plan was sent to all addresses in Greater Vernon. This provided an update. The most important fact is we are waiting for the over $13 Million grant from the federal and provincial government for the Duteau Water Treatment Plant. The ground can not be proken for this work until the project clears the federal environmental assessment and the grant receives final approval. I think it would be wise not to break ground until this is done.

August 10, 2008 5:00 PM

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

The only thing missing is the apology to taxpayers for the long delay and the misleading propaganda prior to the 2004 referendum. Apparently, the Anonymous reader has some information so he could act on behalf of the politicians and provide the apology.

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

Selected articles MS -- 2008-08-10

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

Termination of fire chief sparks furor

By Jennifer Smith - Vernon Morning Star

Published: August 08, 2008 4:00 PM
Updated: August 09, 2008 10:37 PM

News of Coldstream’s fire chief being fired isn’t going over well in the community.

Leo Lecavalier had volunteered his time with the Coldstream Fire Department for nearly 25 years, the last 12 of which he has served as fire chief.

But effective Aug. 1, Lecavalier was let go by the District of Coldstream.

Gyula Kiss, Coldstream Ratepayers’ Association president, calls the dismissal a travesty.

“He’s a very dedicated fire chief,” said Kiss, who was able to work with Lecavalier during his time on council from 1990 to 1999.

When Kiss was elected mayor by voters in 1996, the same year Lecavalier was elected fire chief by department members, Kiss says the chief was a delight to work with.

“I have no problem with him at all.”

What Kiss does have a problem with is the lack of reasoning for Lecavalier’s dismissal.

“I know the fire chief was critical of how the new fire hall construction was carried out, but I don’t know what the real reason is.”

With the November election looming, Kiss hopes to see some clarity on the situation.

“If they want to run for council again this year, they have to speak up.”

Coldstream administration will not go into details about the termination, citing it is confidential information.

“The only comment I can make is that he is no longer with the district,” said Wendy Kay, chief administrative officer.

While Lecavalier was elected by the fire department members, Kay says council has authority over the position.

“Fire chiefs are appointed by council. They are elected but their actual approval is done through council.”

Department members are now waiting for direction from council for the replacement of their fire chief.

Until then, deputy chief Lawrie Skolrood is taking over as acting chief.

“In the meantime we intend to make sure the public safety is upheld,” said Skolrood, adding that his employer — Vernon Fire Rescue — has been very accommodating.

But Skolrood would rather not be in the position he’s been forced into.

“We’re all not happy with what’s happened,” said Skolrood. “Leo’s a stellar fire chief in my mind.”

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

While Council can fire the Fire Chief his status as a fireman is unclear. I am not sure what the Fire Department's Constitution states as to who controls membership in the Volunteer Fire Department. That issue should be clarified to. Council might not have the power to fire a volunteer.

The whole issue of firing has a negative effect on the fire department on which Coldstream taxpayers rely for fire protection. If Coldstream had to replace volunteers with professional firefighters costs to taxpayers would be prohibitive. It is idiotic to upset the system that has been working well for over a hundred years. Just another bad decision!

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

Council's appreciation of our long-time Fire Chief.

The dismissal of the Fire Chief of Coldstream is another major disservice brought upon the taxpayers and the volunteer fire department by the dysfunctional Council.

Since Council did not see fit to release reasons for the firing one can only speculate why this happened. It appears the Chief's undoing was his dissatisfaction with the handling of the construction process and lack of communication during the construction of the new fire hall. It seems, management had no need to consult with the fire department when changes had to be made due to budgetary constraints.

This is not a legitimate reason to fire a long term employee. In fact, when Mayor Corner acknowledged that "I think he is a great fireman, that's certainly not the issue here", he exposed the Municipality to a potential wrongful dismissal suit. Our labour laws protect employees against wrongful dismissal.

Another nasty, underhanded aspect of the dismissal is the timing.
The Chief is only a month away from completing 25 years of meritorious service a feat generally honoured with a commemorative pin or watch. This Council chose to honour his long service with a handshake and a pink slip.

The Chief was instrumental in fighting for the new fire hall which should be opened later this month. It is incredible how mean spirited Council was by firing the Chief before he could enjoy the fruit of his labour.

Taxpayers and Council should be grateful for the sacrifices members of the volunteer firemen. This action relayed their utter disconcert for those sacrifices.

Shame on Council! They better come up with some explanation before November or they will have to explain their action during their election campaign.

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

Responses to firing of Coldstream Fire Chief.

The following comments are from the Vernon Blog. They are responses to the reports on the firing of Coldstream's fire Chief. My only comment is that as long as a person pays taxes to Coldstream that person IS a Coldstream ratepayer. The difference is that some people contribute to functions the Ratepayers Association organizes through their annual membership. Judge the comments for yourself.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anonymous said...

This is soooooo wrong....

Can you say !!!!.."The Coldstream Rate Payers as a special Interst group has influenced this because of the councillors on this present council".. CORNER is useless as a Mayor...Like Wayne MIPPERT, he can't or won't make a decision

He's allowed a disfunctional council wreck Coldstream and in doing so,removed a dedicated member of the Coldstream Fire Department..

This is eexactly what the people will get when special interest groups (Including Veron) try to control the agendas of council..

As a former member of the Rate Payers..these people are radicals and only want to stir up "crap"..

Just wait..this is "silly season" and the proof is in the pudding.

I've heard rumor that the former head of the RCMP detachment in Vernon, Mr KALABABA, might be running for Mayor of Vernon..PLEASE convince him to run for Mayor of Coldstream..We need true leadership

9:04 PM, August 07, 2008

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

Anonymous said...

You want Kolibaba to run do you?
Talk about "special interest"!!

Listen Pal the Coldstream Ratepayers and the Vernon Taxpayers are the only groups who are NOT special interest!

THE ONLY GROUPS!

They are the majority of the citizens in both jurisdictions

You are right come November you will realise that the weary long-suffering taxpayers shall speak as one and out with the 'special interests"

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

Council shows fire chief the door

By Jennifer Smith - Vernon Morning Star

Published: August 07, 2008 6:00 PM

Shock has swept over the Coldstream Fire Department over the dismissal of their beloved fire chief.

Sitting one month shy of his 25-year service mark, volunteer fire chief Leo Lecavalier has been let go by the District of Coldstream.

Coldstream administration will not get into details as to why the longest-running member currently at the fire hall (who has been chief since 1996) has been dismissed.

But Mayor Gary Corner confirmed that Lecavalier’s absence, which came into effect Friday, was not a decision of the fire chief.

“The district made that decision,” said Corner.

Lecavalier could not be reached for comment.

While the chief was elected by the volunteer fire department, the District of Coldstream says it has final approval of the position.

The dismissal has come as a shock to Coldstream Fire Department members, who didn’t find out about it until their Tuesday practice.

“They’re quite saddened and disappointed,” said assistant chief Mike Heenan. “We’re very surprised.”

With Lecavalier gone, Heenan will assist the current deputy chief Lawrie Skolrood, who takes over as acting chief. Skolrood says the community’s safety remains a top priority.

Upset over the dismissal has brought about talks of members walking away from their volunteer positions.

“Leo would like us all to stay but do we want to continue to work for people like that?” said member Dennis Wilson, who has worked alongside Lecavalier since he joined the department 21 years ago.

While the choice remains up to individual firefighters, Heenan doesn’t anticipate a collective action of members walking.

“It was discussed but the membership and the firefighters didn’t see any benefit to putting the public at risk by withdrawing the services,” said Heenan.

In the meantime, they are waiting for direction from Coldstream as to when a new chief should be elected, as there is apparently a desire to review the constitution over the chief’s duties.

The members agree that it’s a job that will be hard to fill, not to mention disrupting continuity.

“He’s a very well-qualified and respected fire chief,” said Heenan of the man who has held such titles as B.C. training officer of the year.

Along with the hours of personal time doing everything from organizing budgets and practices to working on truck designs, the chiefs play a large role in keeping member morale up during a time when new recruits are becoming harder and harder to find.

Lecavalier did an exemplary job of that, said Heenan, since Coldstream’s average member service is about nine years. He estimates the B.C. average to be five or less.

Fire chiefs are also relied on to deal with politics and relay information for the firefighters.

“Leo was our representative, our voice to the council and administration,” said Heenan. “Whatever Leo brought forward was on behalf of the membership.”

It’s all of this, plus his honesty and desire to do everything by the books, that leaves members like Wilson questioning Lecavalier’s dismissal.

“We’re not a very happy bunch over there. We know that Leo didn’t do anything wrong and we just don’t understand the logic of it,” said Wilson, adding that there was no notice of the dismissal.

Lecavalier’s absence comes as the department awaits the anticipated Aug. 15 completion of its new fire hall, which he was instrumental in pushing for.

Lecavalier had expressed concerns with how decision making was handled in regards to the construction of the hall. He said a lack of communication was evident during the process when certain aspects were scrapped or changed due to budget constraints.

Corner would not say whether this had anything to do with Lecavalier being let go.

“It’s all confidential,” said Corner, who did praise Lecavalier’s service.

“I think he’s a great fireman, that’s certainly not the issue here.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Apparently some people in the upper echelon of Coldstream do not take criticism even if it's deserved. Too bad, Leo was a good Fire Chief. I, for one think, it's a travesty. Well, November is a coming!

Read on , Editorial Aug 8 Morning Star!

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

All lose in dismissal of chief

Published: August 07, 2008 6:00 PM

How can a man who has dedicated nearly 25 years to his community be cast aside so effortlessly?

The dismissal of Coldstream's fire chief Leo Lecavalier has undoubtably angered and shocked many.

On top of that, the decision, made by the District of Coldstream, has no answers attached to it. That can only leave one to read between the lines and come up with their own assumptions.

But putting the reasoning and shock aside, let's look at how this decision is going to affect the citizens.

Obviously the fire department will be the hardest hit, since a chain effect of replacing the chief's duties comes in.

Every member will be expected to pick up a little extra slack. It's likely some members won't mind, but it could put a real strain on those who are already feeling pressured for time between their volunteer role, work and families.

Keeping that in mind, there is the question of who will officially fill Lecavalier's large shoes.

There's a real likelihood that no one may want to take on the endless responsibilities and overtime that goes into being a chief. Therefore, Coldstream may be forced to hire a full-time chief.

Lecavalier himself said in his 2006 fire chief's report: "The amount of time and effort required to operate the department is considerable therefore, the district should start thinking about a 'paid' administration soon."

Whether it's a paid chief or other member, guess who'll be on the hook to pay for it – the taxpayers.

But perhaps some comfort can be held knowing the election is coming in November.

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

Further notes on Latecomer Charges.

The latest project by Sugoi Development requires the construction of a sewer trunk line down Aberdeen Road by the developer. This development will require a latecomer contract similar to that drawn up between the District and Coldstream Meadows in Bylaw 1487. A copy of the bylaw is attached for your perusal.

As you can see 48 properties were included in the bylaw and if they connected within the next 10 years they would have to pay almost $10,000 latecomer fees each plus accrued interest of 6% a year. On the 10th year this fee would be between $15,000 and $16,000. These properties are directly adjacent to the new sewer line. No properties distant from the sewer line were included in the deal, such as Bel Air, Bona Vista, De Jong, etc.

If we apply the same principles to this new development we would only have about 20+ properties involved in the latecomer agreement. Imagine the size of the individual latecomer fees due to the developer for up to 15 years with potential accrued interest.

Council purchased the CM contract for $250,000 using operating funds from the existing utility (your money and mine) and offered a carrot to residents to connect to the line for a fraction of the initial latecomer fee ($2,000 per connection instead of the $10,000). There are few takers to date. After all, the $2,000 fee is only a down payment followed by the physical cost of installation and the annual sewer fees presently at $568 per year in addition to their tax of $97.54 per year.

Is Council going to purchase the latecomer contract from Sugoi Development as well? If so, what will they use for money? If not, will it not appear as favouritism to some taxpayers (and developers)? Why should Aberdeen Road residents pay full latecomer fees when McClounie-Mackie residents pay only a fraction of that fee? Why should Sugoi wait for his potential latecomer income (which may not materialize to a large extent) while CM got more than 50 cents on the dollar in advance?

When Councils make hasty, poorly researched decisions they find themselves in an untenable situation like this. Staff, supposed to be experts, are there to provide advice that would prevent situations like this. They are paid good money for their expertise. In my opinion, this time staff failed Council or Council gave the wrong direction to staff. Either way it is not a happy situation for Council.

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

Little known facts about latecomer charges.

When a municipality or a developer finances a service, such as sewer and water, properties subsequently connecting to said service are charged a latecomer charge. In case of a developer it is the municipality that request the oversizing of the particular service and the cost of this oversizing is covered by the latecomer charge. This latecomer charge can only be collected for a maximum of 15 years.

So how does a developer handle the uncertainty of latecomer income? He can’t wait 15 years to recover his investment. It is also possible that much of the income never materializes as the 15-year time limit expires.

Recently I discussed this problem of latecomer charges with a developer. He told me that the only way this dilemma can be solved by making sure that the development is viable without the latecomer income. The cost of the total infrastructure cost is written off against the project. Of course, this cost is calculated into the purchase price of the properties. He considered any amount coming in from latecomer charges as a gift. This approach makes total sense as 15 years could be an eternity for a company.

In this context the latecomer buyout of Coldstream Meadows by the Municipality was an instant gift of $250,000 to CM. Providing a sewer trunk line gift worth $665,000 and paid by the sewer utility could also be construed as a gift.

It is worthwhile to consider the following prohibition in the Community Charter (Division 2. – Restrictions on Providing Assistance):

General prohibition against assistance to business and exceptions

25 (1) Unless expressly authorized under this or another Act, a council must not provide a grant, benefit, advantage or other form of assistance to a business, including

(a) any form of assistance referred to in section 24 (1) [publication of intention to provide certain kinds of assistance], or

(b) an exemption from a tax or fee.

Is it possible that the provision of an extended sewer line to assist Coldstream Meadows in reducing its sewer costs could be viewed as "assistance to business"? I wonder! Don't you?

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

Selected articles MS -- 2008-08-03

Colin Hansen maintains that "...the government is legally required to return all of the carbon tax through offsetting tax cuts". I do have a couple of questions about this argument.

If they are planning to return the money to the taxpayers why collect it in the first place? How will this exchange help the environment? All it does is create a whole new set of bureaucracy.

It was noted by Don Quixote that there is a federal tax on the carbon tax (tax on tax). Total carbon tax expected to be $1.85 billion the GST on which is $92.5 million. How is the BC government going to refund this huge amount to the taxpayers?

Collecting those taxes and then redistributing them will cost a lot of money as well. Those monies will not be returned to the taxpayers either. Does it make sense to do all these crazy book keeping smoke and mirrors in the name of reducing carbon emission? Besides, this move will not reduce carbon emission by a significant degree.

If the government really want to reduce carbon emission in a realistic fashion they should start taxing high emission luxury items such as pleasure yachts, all terrain vehicles, seados and the like. Those items are not necessary items to our well being yet they consume a tremendous amount of energy in their production as well as in their operation.

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

Something to think about.

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

Letters to the Editor -- Morning Star -- 2008-08-03

Letters to the Editor -- for your reading pleasure.

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

Readers write.

Re: Kalavista Boat Traffic Concerns


Apparently Coun. Malerby doesn’t think that boaters will have a concern about paying a fee to launch/park in the Kalavista area . She also indicated that this was suggested when the parking was expanded in 2006…..so why didn’t she follow the suggestions then and avoid some on the nightmare created for this small corner of Coldstream?

My suggestions are as follows:

a) A permit issued by Coldstream (much like the car top boat permits now issued) giving free parking to Greater Vernon boaters. You simply establish residency and are issued a permit to be displayed on your rear view mirror with your license plate displayed.

b) A fee of no less than $10 to purchase an all day parking ticket dispensed from an automated machine for all those without the parking permit.

c) No parking of trailers outside of the designated parking allowed. Fine or tow offenders, with signage showing consequences.

d) When the lot is full, boaters must go elsewhere.

These simply steps would allow us to offset some of the costs associated with this activity (like the salary of an attendant), monitor who actually uses the facility, and decrease the traffic in the area. If the fee and the high price of fuel doesn’t slow the traffic down then double the fee and consider a nominal fee permit for locals.

It should be pointed out that other jurisdictions have this problem also. The Village of Chestermere, east of Calgary, has free parking for local boaters, and charges $40 for day parking for boat trailers, and $30 for seadoo trailers. Visiting boaters from Alberta would not be shocked by a $10/$20 fee…..if they were, there is always Kekuli!

Greg Ockert

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

The trouble with a lie.

The trouble with a lie is that if one repeats it often enough one starts believing it oneself.

That is what seems to be happening with Coldstream Council and staff. They insist that the extension of the McClounie-Aberdeen Road sewer trunk line had nothing to do with Coldstream Meadows' need for sewer connection. It was repeated to me again today by the Coldstream Director of Finance.

They must ask themselves and answer honestly: would we have constructed this trunk line if there was no Coldstream Meadows? The answer is obvious: NO.

Think about it! Council conducted a survey of residents along the proposed line and got a resounding “NO” from them.

Having this information, does anyone believe that Council would have gone ahead with the construction of the line if CM did not need it? I very much doubt it.

There are only 35 residential properties on this route. None of those residents connected to date so they have no benefit from this “service”. Yet they are paying $97.54 annually in taxes for 20 years to pay part of the capital cost of this line. The utility “invested” (they did not want to but Council did it anyway) $665,000 of reserve funds. They are not having any benefit from it either. Who is the beneficiary? Coldstream Meadows. Now you got it!

So Council and staff, keep lying to yourselves and convince yourselves that it was for the benefit of the majority of taxpayers. You provided the “well sewered community” but most you are not participating. Pat yourselves on the backs, you have done a good deed. The question is: for whom?

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

Selected articles MS -- 2008-08-01

Good news for Mayor Corner?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Perhaps we should have a referendum on this important subject? (chuckle, chuckle).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coldstream Council should also understand that they do not own the sewer utility's funds!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

Cost overruns? Come on! What about the $615,000 site sewer cost? Is that part of the cost overrun?

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