Coldstream COW meeting -- April 16, 2012

Agenda package.

There will be a Power Point Presentation on water  issues!

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

Kal Park News -- Spring 2012 Edition

 

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

Is your water bill high? Here is why.

Letter to the Editor

 

 

The above letter was published in the Morning Star on March 9, 2012. The author points out the unintended consequences of our increased water costs. 

 

My report below is intended to explain the reasons for the high costs and suggests a way to improve the situation. Unfortunately, some of the mistakes cannot be corrected but we must ensure that future funds are directed to the right solution. In order to reduce future cost increases we need to have a total plan developed, funds borrowed and repaid on a 20 year plan instead of on a cash basis.

 

Duteau Creek Blues.

It used to be that we supplied irrigation water to domestic customers. It was cheap but lacked quality. So we changed the system. Now we feed treated water to crops and domestic customers alike. It is expensive. Sadly, it is just the beginning of the costs - unless we change our approach.

In 2008 GVW’s budget was just under $6.5 million. This year it is just slightly under $20 million. Next year it is projected to be over $21.5 million. How high will it go? Depends on our resolve to change direction.

In 2000 my water bill for the year was $219.34 for 388 cubic meters of water. In 2012 the same volume of water in the same quarterly distribution would cost $729.44. That’s an increase of $510 or 320% in 12 years. This incredible rate increase is not sustainable.

The consultants who prepared the Master Water Plan of 2002 identified the major problem with our water system as being the result of mixed irrigation and domestic water. They recommended total separation of the two systems. In their opinion continuation of the mixed system would be significantly more expensive than total separation. It appears they were right. To date we spent about $50 million and we are nowhere near the end See Table below).

Despite that advice in 2004 a decision was made to continue with the mixed distribution system, except we made it a lot more expensive.

Here is my personal synopsis that may explain the reasons for the meteoric rise in water costs:

1.    Chose the more expensive plan

In 2004 a decision was made to ignore the recommendations of the consultants and adopted a plan that was rejected by those consultants as significantly more expensive. The interesting reason for selecting this plan was that they feared that the cost of the 2002 plan would have been rejected by the taxpayers.

The 2002 MWP costs for the first phase were estimated to be $71.3 million. Annual financing costs of such sum would be between $5-5.2 million. Annual operation and maintenance of a system proposed by the consultants would likely not have exceeded $5 million. Had we opted for the proposal of 2002 we would have saved a lot of taxpayers dollars. When I bring this up with staff and other politicians the response generally is: “it’s hindsight” and “that door is no longer open”. I strongly believe that “that door” can still be opened with some ingenuity. I’ll explain those options later.

The current plan was heralded to be less expensive than the 2002 plan. Taxpayers were asked to approve $35 million for the project. Yet we have already spent $50 million and we don’t know how much more is needed. It appears to be a bottomless pit.

2.    Chose the wrong financing

When the current plan was selected taxpayers were asked to approve a borrowing referendum of $35 million. Theoretically, that would have cost taxpayers about $2.4 million annually. However, it appears that additional funds to the tune of $2-3 million annually  were also collected on a “cash basis”. These extra funds were to supplement the costs of the infrastructure projects that were not advertised in advance of the referendum. These funds basically equalled the funds collected to pay off the borrowed funds. Ironically, the combined sum would also have covered the cost of $71 million had we borrowed it.

Now we have two treatment plants instead of the one proposed in 2002. The Duteau plant is also more expensive to operate than the Vernon treatment plant yet it only supplies 20-25 % of the total domestic needs of the utility. Further more, the treatment plant at Duteau Creek does not meat neither the quantity nor the quality requirements of the water utility. It is hard to understand how a $29 million treatment plant that did not meet quantity and quality requirements could have been approved.

If we wish to meet the quality and quantity requirements changes must be made. My recommendation is to return to the total separation as proposed in 2002 with some innovative changes. More about that later. However, current proposals indicate a different direction.

3.    Attempting to return to the failed plan

The conventional wisdom is to do a partial separation of the raw water before we divert part of it to the treatment plant. The diverted raw water would be used strictly for crop irrigation. Physical details are not yet available. The plan is supposed to retain the Duteau Treatment plant and ad a filtration plant to meet health requirements.

Detailed financial plans are also unavailable but estimated to be between $50 and $60 million. The problem is that significant amounts of treated water would still be used for irrigation purposes. We would still have difficulty assigning true costs to irrigation water.

The other problem is that the cost of treatment would be very significant, probably between $4-$5 million annually. Remember, the total domestic water provided by the Duteau plant is only about 20-25% of the total domestic needs! Should we spend that much money on partial separation? Should we continue funding the treatment of that small amount of domestic water at those horrendously high costs while continuing to use large amounts of expensive water on crops? Is there an alternative?

I believe there is a viable alternative. It requires some imagination and outside the box thinking. The basic principle is to supply all domestic customers with Kalamalka Lake water. The existing treatment plant on Reservoir Road is producing treated water that has dual disinfection: ultra violet irradiation followed by chlorination. This water is pumped to the Mission Hill reservoir and distributed to domestic customers. About 75% of Greater Vernon customers receive this water. With small expenditures all customers on Middleton Mountain could be converted to Kal water. Customers currently supplied from the Cunliffe reservoir could also be converted with little cost. That would further reduce the need for domestic water from Duteau Creek.

The main issue to tackle, in order to implement this recommendation, is the transfer of various water licenses from upper sources to Kalamalka Lake. We own licenses on Coldstream Creek, King Edward Lake and we could even get a fraction from Duteau Creek. It is mostly an administrative issue and politicians of all levels should lobby for these administrative changes. There is no reason why we could not utilize our license capacity at Kal Lake. The further down the course we remove the water the more use it provides for fish habitat and other uses.

Politicians of all levels should join to lobby to bring about the change in allowable license transfer. It serves the greater good of the community. The total separation of the agricultural and domestic water system would guarantee greater accounting of costs and availability of our valuable commodity.

After settling on an acceptable plan total costs must be calculated, required funds borrowed and repaid on a 20 year schedule. The current method of removing cash ($2 million this year, proposed to be $4 million next year and annually thereafter) must be discontinued. Amortization of new infrastructure should be discontinued until all borrowed funds are repaid.

The foregoing report is strictly my interpretation of the available date using all available reports.

 

 

Table of expenses to date: GVWU.

 

 

As always, your comments are solicited and welcome. Next Monday I will be making a Power Poin presentation at the COW meeting in Counci Chambers. Everyone welcome.

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

 

Coldstream Council meeting -- April 10, 2012. Remember, it's on Tuesday!

Agenda Package

Coldstream's tax revenue distribution for information.

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

Readers Write -- CANADIAN BEEF

THIS IS A GOOD DECENT MAN WHO TOOK THE TIME TO WRITE THIS AND HE SIGNED THE STATEMENT INCLUDING HIS CONTACT INFO:

I'm sure those of you who aren't in the cattle business don't understand the issues here. But to those of us whose living depends on the cattle market, selling cattle, raising the best beef possible...This is frustrating.

This will keep us from ever stopping there again, even for a drink.

The original message is from the Alberta Cattle Feeders Association.

Canadian cattle producers are very passionate about this.

McDonald's claim there is not enough beef in Canada to support their restaurants. Well, we (ACFA) know that is not so. Our opinion is they are looking to save money at our expense. The sad thing of it is that the people of Canada are the ones who made McDonald's successful in the first place, but we are not good enough to provide the beef.

We personally are no longer eating at McDonald's, which I am sure does not make an impact, but if we pass this around maybe there will be an informed impact felt.

All Canadians that sell cattle at a livestock auction barn have to sign a paper stating that we do NOT EVER feed our cattle any part of another animal... South Americans are not required to do this as of yet.

McDonald's has announced that they are going to start importing much of their beef from South America . The problem is that South Americans aren't under the same regulations as Canadian beef producers, and the regulations they have are loosely controlled.

They can spray numerous pesticides on their pastures that have been banned here at home because of residues found in the beef. They can also use various hormones and growth regulators that we can't. The Canadian public needs to be aware of this problem and that they may be putting themselves at risk from now on by eating at McDonald's.

Canadian ranchers raise the highest quality beef in the world and this is what Canadians deserve to eat. Not beef from countries where quality is loosely controlled. Therefore, I am proposing a boycott of McDonald's until they see the light.

For me, everything is not always about the bottom line when it comes to jeopardizing my family's health, that is where I draw the line.

I am sending this note to about 30 people.
If each of you send it to at least 10 more
(30 x 10 = 300) ... and those 300 send it to at least ten more (300 x 10 = 3,000) ... and so on, by the time the message reaches the sixth generation of people, we will have reached over THREE MILLION consumers!

I'll bet you didn't think you and I had that much potential, did you?
Acting together we can make a difference. If this makes sense to you,
please pass this message on.

Larry Latam
Sylvia Van Oene R.N.
Occupational Health Services (HSD)
XL Foods Inc.
Lakeside Packers Brooks , Alberta, Canada.

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

 

Column: B.C. Hydro finally owns up to defective smart meter – but only one

This faulty B.C. Hydro smart meter was installed in a Kamloops-area home and had to be removed after clocking up a usage total so ridiculously huge that a Hydro employee has scrawled on it in marker pen "NFG" which is slang for "No F---ing Good." It would have resulted in a bill of around $4,000.

Photograph by: Submitted, PNG Archive.

Clock on image for full story!

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

Japanese Ghost Ship: Coast Guard Sinks Ryou-Un Maru In The Gulf Of Alaska

Click on image!

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

Cherryville: Father and son arrested in Van Diest homicide probe.

My Valley Sun – News Update

www.myvalleysun.com

April 5, 2012

RCMP confirms that a father and son have been arrested and charged in the Halloween night murder of Armstrong teenager Taylor Van Diest last year. Former Cherryville resident Matthew Foerster, 26, was arrested Wednesday and charged with second-degree murder in the 18-year-old's slaying. His father, 58-year-old Steven Foerster, has been charged with obstruction of justice and accessory after the fact. more

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

 

Photo Gallery - Happy Easter! - Courtesy: Debbie.

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

The Borowitz report -- Physicals or strip searches?

In Controversial Decision, Supreme Court Replaces Annual Physicals with Strip Searches

Major Expansion of Police Officers’ Role

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report) – In a stunning decision on the future of healthcare in America, the Supreme Court decided today that annual physicals were unconstitutional and should be replaced by random strip searches conducted by the nation’s police.

The decision, which appeared to expand the role of the police to include such duties as performing breast and prostate exams, took many in both the healthcare and law enforcement communities by surprise.

Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote, “While the Constitution makes no provisions for healthcare, it explicitly defends the people’s right to form militias; clearly, the Founders believed that if anyone should be looking up our asses it shouldn’t be a doctor, but someone with a gun.”

By replacing annual checkups with random strip searches, the Court raised worries in the healthcare community that patients would not get the care they need, but those concerns were brushed aside by Justice Samuel Alito.

“Ultimately, the responsibility to secure adequate medical attention falls to the citizen,” he said. “When a policeman is searching his body cavities, for example, it’s up to the citizen to say, ‘There’s a mole I’d like you to look at.’”

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that he was personally ready for a random strip search/exam at any moment, adding, “I’ve got nothing on under this robe.” Get a free subscription to the Borowitz Report here.

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

GVAC Agenda - April 5, 2012

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

Recreation Centre is "business as usual" throughout repairs.

 

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

National Wildlife Week is April 8-14, 2012,

 

National Wildlife Week is April 8-14, 2012, and to celebrate, Allan Brooks Nature Centre Society, North Okanagan Naturalists’ Club, Ribbons of Green Trail Society and Friends of Kalamalka Lake Provincial Park will host a regional Walk for Wildlife event on April 14, 2012! 

The Walk for Wildlife campaign is a Canadian Wildlife Federation initiative that is now in its third year. The event aims to encourage Canadians from coast to coast to get outdoors and experience the beauty of the wildlife and natural spaces locally. This year marks the 50^th anniversary of the Canadian Wildlife Federation, so to commemorate the year it all began (1962) CWF is pushing the envelope again, and has set a goal to log 19,620 km nationwide, all the while creating national awareness about our natural habitats and the wildlife that calls them home.

The Walk for Wildlife event on Saturday, April 14^th from 10AM to 2PM will occur at three locations in the Vernon area including: Swan Lake Nature Reserve, Middleton Mountain Regional Park and Kalamalka Lake Provincial Park. The public is encouraged to come out with family or friends to celebrate wildlife and nature in our area. There will be prizes, lots of give-aways and plenty for fun for everyone! Volunteers will be on-site to chat with you about flora and fauna of the area, to lead impromptu guided walks, as well as to share information about these three beautiful trail assets of our region.

Members from each host organization will be on-site to coordinate public sign-up and participation, including tracking all kilometers walked, and distribution of lots of free stuff during the event. North Okanagan Naturalists’ Club and Allan Brooks Nature Centre volunteers will be on hand at Swan Lake Nature Reserve, Ribbons of Green Trail Society will be at Middleton Mountain Regional Park, and Friends of Kalamalka Lake Provincial Park will be at all three gates of Kal. Park (Cousin’s Bay, Red Gate and main gate), with a tent at the main gate twin bay parking lot. 

Some of the materials to be given away include: Canadian Wildlife Federation 2012 Calendars, and Walk for Wildlife pins, and BC Ministry of Environment Species Information Sheets. In kind support is also being provided by Regional District North Okanagan, City of Vernon, District of Coldstream, Rancho Vignola, Vernon Telescope Nature & Science, and Vantage One Credit Union.

Youth participants (14 years of age and younger) are also encouraged to take nature-themed photos during the event and enter the All Things Natural photo contest hosted by Allan Brooks Nature Centre. All photo entries should be clearly labeled with the name and age of the photographer and submitted to: atn.photocontest@gmail.com. 

Aaron Deans

Executive Director

Allan Brooks Nature Centre Society

778.932.0480

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

 

RDNO Board meeting info

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

Coldstream Committee of the Whole meeting - April 2, 2012

Agenda package

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

The Borowitz Report -- April Fools.

Having trouble reading this email? Click here to view online.     April 1, 2012 Republicans Reveal that Entire Presidential Race was a Prank April Fool’s Day Announcement Brings Practical Joke to an End WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report) – In an April Fool’s Day announcement that took the political world by storm, the Republican Party revealed today that its entire presidential race had been an elaborate prank. “April Fool!” exclaimed former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum at a press conference in Washington, where they were joined by fellow merrymakers Newt Gingrich, Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry and Herman Cain. Moments after revealing that the GOP primary had been one long practical joke, Mr. Santorum explained the rationale behind staging such a complicated and expensive prank. “A lot of Americans are suffering right now and need a good laugh,” he said.  “I think my colleagues and I can be justifiably proud of the entertainment we provided – even if it meant me wearing these ridiculous sweater vests.” Former Godfather’s Pizza CEO Herman Cain agreed that the prank had gone well, but added, “I’m just amazed that the American people never figured out we were kidding.” “I mean, I kept saying ‘9-9-9’ every four seconds, which was total and utter bullshit,” he said.  “And everything out of Michele’s mouth made her sound like a mental patient.” “True that,” Rep. Bachmann agreed. Texas Governor Rick Perry said he worried that “every time I screwed up at a debate people would figure out I was pulling their legs,” but added, “The American people seemed to accept the idea that a Governor of Texas could be a blithering idiot.” When one reporter mentioned that Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) was not at the press conference, a sudden silence fell over the gathering. “Did anyone ever tell Ron this was supposed to be a prank?” Mr. Romney asked.  “Holy cow, maybe he’s really serious.”  Get a free subscription to the Borowitz Report here.   Upcoming Events April 17, 2012 at 06:00 PM New York – Free Show! Join Andy and his special guests, New York Times bestselling author Sloane Crosley and Thurber Award-winning humorist David Rakoff for an evening of comedy.  (Note: this event is free.  There are no advance tickets - people will be seated on a first come, first served basis.) Location: Miller Theater, Columbia University 2960 Broadway at 116th Street For tickets go to No Advance Tickets The Borowitz Report: Waste Someone's Time: Forward to a Friend. Sign up today for your own Borowitz Reports. Remove me from this list.

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

RDNO Press release!

 

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

Readers write -- Agricultural Bylaw debate!.

The following messages were submitted by readers in reverse chronological order. Comments are welcome,

 

Thanks Maria,

Recently CKNW radio had a discussion re the issue of "Country Estates", I couldn't find the story on their website, however, the following article provides an excellent overview re both the issues, and proposed solutions to this troubling trend:

 

http://www.abbynews.com/news/117442983.html

 

Regards,

Katy

P.S. feel free to pass this info on to the others you have c.c'd

 

 

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

 

Further information from Councillor Besso. 

 

-------Original Message-------

From: Maria Besso

Date: 3/29/2012 12:36:21 AM

To: Coldstreamer

 

Perhaps it would be useful to inform the readers that the ALR land in Coldstream is already very heavily parcelized.

57 % of Coldstream's land base is within the ALR. The total land base in Coldstream is 6,429 ha.

 

According to Map 2.1 of the July 2009 Coldstream Agricultural Plan, there are 824 parcels in Coldstream that are all or partially in the ALR, of those 824 parcels, 640 of them are already less than 4 hectares ( ie 77.6 % of the parcels are NOT sub dividable because they are already under 4ha.)

* note that under the present RU-2, it would imply that the minimum parcel size you could subdivide to would be 2 hectares, since you could not subdivide anything smaller than 4 hectares to arrive at parcels 2 ha or bigger, then all the parcels that are already less than 4 ha are non-subdividable (unless they are excluded from the ALR, or qualify for a homesite severance.)

The reality of owning property in the ALR ( regardless of the implied zoning under the Official Community Plan OCP) is that all subdivision must be approved by the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) . In the last 10 years in Coldstream there have been 17 applications for subdivision in the ALR ( apart from ALR exclusions or non-farm use, or Homesite severances ) of these 17 applications to subdivide - all were refused by the ALC. So wether you designate your minimum lot size as 2 ha or 10 ha, if your land is in the ALR, the ALC, for all practical purposes, does NOT approve ANY subdivision.

So designating all the ALR land in Coldstream as RU-10 changes nothing for 77.6% of the parcels. Wether they are called RU-2 or RU-10, they remain the same size that they are, and they are clearly not able to be subdivided. The perceived change comes for the owners of the remaining 184 parcels (22.33% of the parcels), these parcels are over 4ha.

We have already established that the ALC practice is NOT to approve subdivision in the ALR regardless of the minimum parcel size stipulated in a Community's OCP.

So in changing the zoning to RU-10 in our OCP we are simply bringing the Community zoning in line with the reality of the rules of the ALC, and the desire to maintain land in the ALR in the Province of British Columbia, rather than see it cut up into smaller and smaller chunks. In Coldstream there are only 32 parcels totally or partially in the ALR that are larger than 20 ha., so theoretically they may still be sub-dividable into minimum 10 ha. parcels but that is unlikely because it would also require ALC approval. That portion only represents 3.9% of the ALR parcels in Coldstream and the Agricultural Advisory Committee felt that there would not be significantly higher advantage to increase the minimum lot size to 30hectares ( as recommended by the Ministry of Agriculture) because it would be perceived as too harsh. So therefore the 10 ha minimum parcel size is a compromise, but it does not change the reality of ALC policy and historical decisions.

The sad reality is that Coldstream's ALR has already been subdivided into small chunks, it just may not appear that way because many of those smaller chunks may be farmed together as one larger entity. For example; the Coldstream Ranch is made up of 129 parcels, and 47% of these parcels ( 61) are already subdivided into chunks that are less than 4hectares in size.

We have just witnessed the sale of Jamie Kidston's orchard, it had appeared to everyone as one farm, but it was actually made up of 4 parcels ( that were subdivided long ago), three were sold off to separate owners, and they risk becoming Country Estates. Fortunately, for now, the new owners have agreed to keep farming the land as one orchard and pool their resources, hopefully this will set a good example and keep farming viable for those owners.

Gyula please feel free to post this as I hope it will serve to better explain the reasoning behind the changes to zoning proposed in the new Coldstream Agricultural Plan.

Thanks,

Maria Besso

 

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

Urgent Message To the CRA membership:

If you are in support of Coldstream Council's Zoning Bylaw Amendment (to preserve ALR land) which specifies that future subdivision of ALR land be limited to a minimum parcel size of 10 hectares, please go to Municipal Hall and fill out the appropriate form, or go to Coldstream's Website:
 http://www.districtofcoldstream.ca/notices/comment_sheet.php

The deadline for doing this is today (Mar. 28).
Since this is such short notice, please respond at least by supporting the item entitled New Rural 10 (RU.10) Zone – lot area 2ha to 10ha, as it sends the message that you support this council in its endeavours to honour the OCP and protect and preserve our agricultural lands.

Thank you for your support.
Steve Heeren, Acting President,
Coldstream Ratepayers Association

 

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