Thursday, November 20, 2014

Water Logic...


POST PRODUCTION NOTE: Nov.22/14
Thank you to the following commenter, who clarified: 


"Just a point of correction, the you tube video is Councillor Besso's presentation (the same was given, to no avail, at GVAC March 6th, 2014).
Councillor Kiss also presented at the College during the municipal campaign and also presented to GVAC around the same time. His presentation is in power point form and can be seen on his blog"


POST PRODUCTION NOTE:  Nov.22/14
Councillor Kiss' powerpoint presentation details:
  
"PowerPoint review of the proposed Master Water Plan. Included are cost consequences and possible alternatives. Most important issue is an independent review of the plan!

Find the presentation https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7Oebqfj6X-LN0F2ek9WbUtrVzQ/view


Best way to view images. Left click on image, right click on new image, left click on "view image", left click on image. You have full view of image"





Where all the others on the Greater Vernon Advisory Committee failed.
They just didn't "get it".

Coldstream Councillor Gyula Kiss' powerpoint presentation is worth watching, at full volume, with former Councillor Besso narrating.

Here is the 17:49 video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_J9aWGjqoQ

"The best 17 minutes you'll spend today," attests Kia.


Wednesday, November 19, 2014

Patronizing, Pompous and Condescending MLA


He has some nerve to state that funds may not be available.
As though Eric Foster's bosses in Victoria haven't pissed away enough!

We residents are presumably to show some semblance of restraint and not expect our failed water referendum's projects to be funded by Victoria?

How about failed water referenda in both Kamloops and Revelstoke?
They subsequently each received a water treatment plant, compliments of Victoria, thank you very much when residents said "no".

You think we've forgotten all the folks lined up at the public trough?  Huge salaries for even deputy ministers and government executives, and BC Hydro, ICBC and their administrations, to name but a few.  Top executives at BC Investment Management Corp got a 310 per cent wage increase, the B.C. Ferries CEO makes more than top three Washington State ferries executives...on and on it goes.

The Morning Star reported MLA Foster as saying: "A vote 'yes' or 'no' doesn't make a difference about getting the government involved...that's not what would drive it.  Funding is allocated on the merit of an application and if there is funding available."

Drive it?
How dare you even mention the word "merit".
Didn't Interior Health convince their government brothers that "the safety of residents' drinking water" is considered meritous?

Your attitude, Eric Foster, is patronizing, pompous and condescending.
And we don't like it.
Remember that some of us still recall a different Eric Foster 30 years ago...one who knew how to spell the word humility, the first bag you shed when you became MLA.

Instead of your frequent polishing of the door handles at the regional district, try spending an equal amount of time talking to residents--in coffee shops, in malls, at gas stations.  You will quickly learn what you need to learn.
Certainly more than you're learning from bureaucrats with the focus on collaborative efforts.
It's just more bureaucratic schmaltz.
Because you're listening to the wrong people, Eric Foster.

We North Okanagan residents will not be bullied by you or anyone else.   

Fiscal mismanagement in Victoria now fills volumes of media reports--indeed tomes--most notably since Christy Clark's rise to the helm of the B.C. Liberal party. 

What's most upsetting about having typed that last sentence is that I'm a B.C. Liberal.
Okay, former Socred.
Yup.
Since 2011 and 2012, though, I'm more inclined to hold my nose when considering the Liberals' management of this formerly fine province.

Step back from your preconceived notions, Eric Foster, learned from bureaucrats within the confines of the regional district boardroom.
That's far too safe because you end up hearing only what you want to hear.

Go talk to people...taxpayers and you'll get an eye-opener.
The problem started with one premise:  Former GVW Manager Al Cotsworth's admission on why Duteau Water Treatment Plant needed to be built:  "We need to be able to change sources (from Duteau to Kal Lake, and vice versa) during emergencies such as water main breaks or serious contamination".

Throw out that premise.
Start again.

Consider, yes consider, what Gyula Kiss has been saying all along, quoted in the newspaper today:  "...a solution where the Duteau source would provide untreated raw water to the agricultural community and create a supply of treated water to the 20 per cent of domestic customers currently supplied by the irrigation line."

Because 80 per cent of Duteau's chlorinated water is used for irrigation!

Coldstream Councillor Kiss is hoping his "scientific solution--without the crazy political interference"--will be the cream that rises to the top of the slurry.
And it should but it hasn't yet.
But this Master Water Plan will NOT be accepted by residents.

So the powers-that-be had better reconsider Kiss' idea.

We residents are all thinking the same thing:  Could not someone--anyone--have recommended that that 20 per cent of Duteau's customers, who need domestic water, have received a one-time government donation/grant of state of the art water treatment for their home.  Not unlike the government program that donated farmers water meters two years ago...when the rest of us had to pay for meters.

All others, latecomers (new owners from real estate sales, home renovators, etc.) to the chiefly Lavington/East Coldstream area, would be advised that the grant period had ended and that they were solely responsible for domestic water quality.

That would've been a hell of a lot cheaper than what GVW is proposing with the $70 million water plan.
Probably $50 million cheaper...

What'll it take to have common sense prevail? 
First, Eric Foster should get out and talk to the people who pay the bills, who pay his wages (and fund his pension).

"It may take more than civil disobedience and not paying Q1 water bills," offers Kia "to show our contempt for the way we residents are bullied by bureaucrats and politicians."

Yes it might.
But firstly remember that Interior Health works for us, the taxpayers.
Not the other way around.
Same with politicians, of all stripes...and pomposity.




 
BC Ferries CEO Mike Corrigan made more than the top three Washington State Ferries executives combined." - See more at: http://northerninsights.blogspot.ca/2014/09/managers-justify-generous-treatment-of.html#sthash.93jrFwDq.dpuf
BC Ferries CEO Mike Corrigan made more than the top three Washington State Ferries executives combined." - See more at: http://northerninsights.blogspot.ca/2014/09/managers-justify-generous-treatment-of.html#sthash.93jrFwDq.dpuf

CHBC-TV on Failed Water Referendum


Good job, CHBC-TV in Kelowna.

For including an interview with Gyula Kiss, a director of the Greater Vernon Advisory Committee, on the failed water referendum held in the North Okanagan November 15th, 2014.

Mr. Kiss' opposition to the Master Water Plan was supported by the electorate.

Sunday, November 16, 2014

2014 Local Elections


Vernon:
Akbal Mund, Mayor:  3,714
Victor Cumming 3,089.
Mary-Jo O'Keefe 1,319
Klaus Tribes 1,011
Jamie Morrow 442

Vernon Council:
Brian Quiring 4,275
Bob Spiers 4,162
Juliette Cunningham 4,120
Catherine Lord 4,006
and newcomers:  Dalvir Nahal 3,919; Scott Anderson 3,805.

Outside the 6 seats:
Kari Gares 3,581
Mark Olsen 3,514
Jack Gilroy 3,451
Shawn Lee 3,271
Janet Green 3,027
James Todd 1,568
Colt Wilson 1,127
Art Gourley 768.

Coldstream:  (Mayor acclaimed:  Jim Garlick)

Coldstream Council:  
Doug Dirk 1,670
Pat Cochrane 1,586
Gyula Kiss 1,537
Richard Enns 1,463
Peter McClean 1,422
Glen Taylor 1,366

Outside the 6 seats:
Shane Hillman 1,351 (missing a seat by only 15 votes).

Referring to his win, Vernon's new mayor stated "It's exciting."

"Vernon's results are juxtaposed with the deafening yawn arising from Coldstream," offers Kia.

Thank goodness Gyula Kiss received voter assent in Coldstream; it's surprising he didn't top the polls to thank him for his work on the water plan's technical committee.

Anyone notice that no voter percentages have been released?

Civic web director/school districts here

Acclaimed Mayor is Part of the Problem


So why quote him after the $70 million water referendum in the North Okanagan fails?

Why not interview Coldstream Councillor Gyula Kiss, whose spearheading of the Master Water Plan's opposition--as the only elected representative (and scientist) on the plan's technical committee--received support from the electorate?

Opposed to the plan were 7,918 residents, while 3,999 voted in favour.
Virtually two-to-one.

But noooooo, Vernon's Morning Star today quoted Coldstream Mayor Jim Garlick as saying "There will be work going ahead...staff will meet with the Interior Health Authority on the results and get feedback from them."

That's not what 7,918 residents want.

Jumping with both feet into the hole he himself helped dig, Mayor Garlick added "The overall number of $70 million was the problem."

No, the overall number was not the problem, Mayor Garlick, although $70 million was a close second on the list of taxpayer complaints.

What people want is that no chlorinated water be used for irrigation of acreages.
And they sure as hell don't want chlorinated water--today used for irrigation of acreages--to also be filtered, which is what the $70 million borrowing referendum included.



"Garlick shouldn't give up his day job," sniffs Kia, adding "he'd never make it as a clairvoyant."

Not representing his constituents seems to have become Mayor Garlick's strong point.

"A pity that Victor Cumming didn't reside--and run for Mayor--in Coldstream," adds Kia.

Yup.
Six hundred twenty-five votes separated Cumming from candidate Mund for Vernon Mayor.



Thursday, November 6, 2014

Who's Making Decisions?


Who is in charge of Greater Vernon if--as a blog commenter recently posted--the Greater Vernon Advisory Committee is just that:  an advisory committee, with no decision-making responsibility in their mandate.  

The commenter writes:  "Committees are forums to allow stakeholders to discuss specific issues in detail but all committees are advisory in nature, decision making remains with the Regional Board" this from the RDNO website. No mention of governance or management here. Perhaps that is the problem, the terms of reference or the lack thereof."

The Regional District of North Okanagan--one of 28 in the province of B.C.--lists six municipalities and five electoral areas under their "membership" purview.  The regional district's Board of Directors are drawn--ostensibly for representation purposes--advisory committees.  The word "under" is paramount.   The Board of Directors of the regional district is supposedly in charge of all committees, once bylaws have been approved by the provincial Inspector of Municipalities.  (During last year's recycling plan change in this area, it was reported that 18 regional districts of the province would each receive $1 million from the recycler to launch the program...which led this blog author to believe there were only 18, although the government website states there are 27 (or 28) regional districts in B.C.)

On governance, the regional district states: 

Governance
Regional districts are governed by a board consisting of two types of directors:

  • Electoral Area Directors are elected directly by rural area voters, and serve three-year terms.
  • Municipal Directors are first elected to a municipal council, and are then appointed by their council to the Regional District board for a one-year term.
The board selects its own chairperson, who generally sets up committees to deal with issues such as planning, environmental management, and regional growth.
The Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan consists of 13 directors – one from each of the electoral areas and one from each of the municipalities, with the exception of the City of Vernon, which appoints three directors.

Note that nowhere on that governance link is it stated who--or what--has the ultimate power to make decisions, or indeed to veto a planned service or project at any planning stage.   The Inspector of Municipalities sets the rules since regional districts were created in the mid-1960s.  Interesting though is that one of the first things stated in the Act is that:  The inspector is to be attached to the office of the minister and is to be under the control of the minister.

No such statement is made under the regional district or advisory planning committee's mandate.  

Service providers that pre-date regional districts are improvement districts, who generally provide one service such as water, or waste management, governed by an elected board of trustees.  One such improvement district is the Black Mountain Irrigation District, about whose water management success--and managing water costs--this blog has written previously here and here and here.

The upcoming Referendum on Greater Vernon Water's plan to borrow $70 million has raised considerable furor among residents, many of whom don't even know if they're eligible to vote.

Lately, many residents have expressed abject surprise (mostly pleasure) that incumbent mayoralty and councillor candidates--most of whom sat on the Greater Vernon Advisory Committee, the group of decision-makers that approved the Master Water Plan going to referendum--are stating they will vote "No".   It's been stated that this referendum is just one phase of the plan, with no indication of what future phases will include or at what cost.

Could it not also be said that current Greater Vernon Advisory Committee members--by allowing the contentious Master Water Plan to proceed to referendum--have not "safeguarded the 'public interest', while providing a balance between local government broad powers and autonomy and the transparency and accountability owed to the electorate." 
People may recall the comment from acclaimed mayor Jim Garlick of Coldstream--who was on the GVAC committee that approved the plan--that the referendum "is educational".


Autonomy?  Did Greater Vernon Advisory Committee members consider moral responsibility to their constituents as they learned of the plan from bureaucrats?  Or were they simply harangued into agreement?  In numerous and increasing ways, a local government corporation (despite it also requiring committee members) may in retrospect now appear to be superior to the governance exhibited by members of this regional district.  

Is the preliminary "no" vote of committee members an indication they've listened to their constituents concerns about water rates?  
Or are they now waffling on something that they were instrumental in allowing to proceed to this point?
Or are bureaucrats at the regional district so powerful that the Master Water Plan has been pushed through without the apparent ability of committee members to serve their constituents?  


 Is it any surprise, then, that last year's "amalgamation" push by the Society for the Governance of Greater Vernon perhaps focused on the wrong target?  
"Way too much government" the public was heard to say, yet Coldstream's elected officials saw no benefit in participating in yet another a governance review (think back to Ida Chong's call for a governance review...)

I believe it was Vernon Councillor Mary-Joe O'Keefe (now a Vernon mayoralty candidate) who last year summarily commented on the area's three administrations that included the regional district with the description:  "It's dysfunctional".  Many today would agree.

Perhaps the Society should have focused on maintaining the status quo in Coldstream and Vernon and eliminating the regional district.  "Give the outlying areas--now governed by directors of the regional district--to their nearest municipality or city as they can certainly use the tax dollars" was suggested, i.e. Cherryville to Lumby, Spallumcheen to Armstrong, etc. etc.

Perhaps the best kept secret was the reply from one anonymous senior elected official:  "That's probably a good idea".

...and we'll maintain the individual's anonymity.

Did we learn who is in charge?
Where does the buck stop?
 


"We've learned that bucks are being pulled out of residents' wallets at an alarming rate," offers Kia.

Wednesday, November 5, 2014

Bless the Black Mountain Irrigation District


...and the people who run it.

The only thing that upsets me--and acquaintances and colleagues--is that we don't live there.
Or that they aren't in charge of Greater Vernon Water here.

Here's Black Mountain's one page rate sheet for acreages and residential water usage...note the whopping $10.00 for new accounts!

No small peanuts, the Black Mountain Irrigation District is the largest improvement district in the province!  They manage 600 square kilometres of watershed.  Read and see photos here

And look at their recent projects!  Here.
Very impressive.

They are an autonomous local government body responsible for providing water services for the benefits of our ratepayers.

"Note the benefits are to the ratepayers," says Kia, "not the regional district's coffers."

Their officials work for the residents, unlike those at Greater Vernon Water.

Let's invite their Board of Trustees to have a look at the master water plan!
Al Horning is at the far right in photo.  He's a former MP, also MLA, and brought considerable money to the irrigation district from governments.



Forewarned, Bureaucrats Don't Care


There's an adage that "forewarned is forearmed", meaning if you know of something before it happens, you can be prepared for it.
True enough.
And presumably make changes if undesired results might occur.


But GVW bureaucrats and engineers, and their engineering consultants either didn't believe it would happen...or they don't care.
Probably not in their job descriptions to care.

"We were completely blindsided when we received our first Vernon utility bill in the mail."
M.C.R. Krien

Ignoring cause and effect, bureaucrats are ALL about revenue.
The unparalleled gouging of residents by Greater Vernon Water officials surely wouldn't lead to residents abandoning Vernon.
Or would it?





A letter to the editor by M.C.R. Krien today explains what GVW officials didn't plan on--and certainly didn't want publicized if it did occur.

"...if the water usage isn't high enough they tack on an extra $72.30 per quarter for low consumption."

"When my wife and I first considered moving to Vernon, we thought we did our homework on property taxes and fees.  We moved here from another Okanagan location, had a more expensive home but our property taxes, including water, sewer, garbage, recycling (all these utility fees were included in our annual property tax bill), were still less than Vernon, nonetheless we decided we could live with the increase.

We were completely blindsided when we received our first Vernon utility bill in the mail.  These obscene utility rates have got to be Vernon's best kept secret.  Not a word mentioned by real estate agents or anyone else when we were enquiring about property tax rates and fees.  But since then, things have gone from bad to worse.

We received this quarter's water and sewer bill for a whopping $440.  We live on small lot in a gated community where all of the irrigation systems come on for the same amount of time each week.  We have dual-flush, water-saver toilets.  There are only two of us and we are away a great deal of the time.

We don't just let water run down the drain when we are washing fruit and vegetables, but instead run it into a bucket in the sink and then either use the wter to water shrubs and bushes or flush the toilet.  We only take short showers, don't have a hot tub and, as well, shut our irrigation off on rainy days and have a water-saver washing machine.

Furthermore we take our vehicles to the car wash instead of washing them at home.

I compared our utility bill with our neighbours to find that our bill was $200 higher and they often have their grandchildren staying with them.  And they thought their bill was high.  We did notice that our bill contained an extra charge for $72.30 for residential sewer low flat rate, which did not show on any of our neighbours' bills.

We went to city hall to enquire why our rates would be so high and for an explanation for the extra $72.30 charge.  It was explained to us that when they determine the sewer rates in the first quarter, if the water usage isn't high enough they tack on an extra $72.30 per quarter for low consumption.

Yes, that is for low consumption.

So while our neighbours are only paying $50.20 per quarter for base sewer rates, we are paying the $50.20 base rate plus an additional $72.30 for low consumption.  In addition, our bill comparison shows that somehow my wife and I managed to use 65 cubic metres more water than our neighbours.

City hall gave us some tablets for our toilets to test for leaks -- there are no leaks.  They suggested we not run any water and check our water meter to see if the little red tab is still rotating.  It isn't.

Now they are asking Vernon area residents to aprove a $70 million water upgrade, which by the way is only the beginning.

We will be saying so long Vernon.  We are not about to stay living here just to be gouged.  And really, who in their right mind would move to Vernon with the rates already so high and only to get worse?

I suppose the uniformed(sic) like us.  We now know of several younger retirees with higher than average incomes and high percentages of disposal incomes, which should be an asset to any community, who have already left or are planning to leave.  I expect we will be joining the exodus."
M.C.R. Krien




"Call for resignations at GVW," suggest Kia, "start anew, bring in Al Horning from the Black Mountain Water District as an advisor."

And not with another $650,000 study.
And tell Interior Health to be quiet unless they bring money to the table...lots of money, from both Victoria and Ottawa.

Sorry to lose you, Mr. and Mrs. Krien.
But a sincere thanks for taking the time to write the letter.

A good start would be to read this "Water Plan History Detailed, dated February 7, 2014" from Coldstream Councillor Kiss.


Monday, November 3, 2014

A Nice Diversion...


...from the area's political and bureaucratic issues.

It's November and, despite the weather remaining relatively mild, time to get crackin' on winter protection for the palms.

Palms?
In the Okanagan?  Winter?
Yup...palm trees.


It's just a matter of knowing how to keep the fronds, and roots of course, from freezing.


Plus not giving in to the provincial government's ban on incandescent lights...C-7 Christmas lights, which I've kept!  They emit warmth versus LED lights, which do not.

The most important part is the T-3 Thermocube which turns lights on when it registers temp dropping to 35F...and lights are turned off by the thermocube when it registers 45F.

"Teepees" made of either steel fence posts--or $1 broom handles from the dollar store--covered with 6 ml vapor barrier, taped closed with Tuck Tape will hold cooler temperatures at bay for a while.  But the second cover is old solar pool blankets, stretched loosely over the vapor barrier to provide an insulating air space, and held in place with more tape and heavy rocks.

Pictures tell it better:

Ah...palm trees...they love the Okanagan's hot dry summers



One of two Washingtonia filiferas gets its "teepee" frame made of 8'foot long steel fence posts.  C-7 Christmas lights can be seen on the ground at its base.  These lights will heat the interior once a 6 ml vapor barrier skin is applied, followed by an old solar pool blanket.

  

Not all the palms are Washingtonia.  One Brahea armata, and one Chamaeroops humilis var. cerifera is also protected.

The 3 plants between the teepees are Yucca Rostrata "sapphire skies".  They'll receive teepee framed plastic protection as well, but no heat.



Yuccas simply need their crowns to remain dry through winter, and plastic will provide that.


Then there's this brute...a 10-foot Trachycarpus fortunei (Windmill Palm)...which receives a styrofoam-insulated plywood palm hut, its interior heated with a space heater also controlled by a T-3 thermocube.

Trachycarpus fortunei, a little crooked because we tried to pull it straight.  Its plywood palm hut panels will be bolted to the railway tie base shown.



The palm hut during a later winter day in another year.


Have you ever seen flowers on a palm tree?
Like all plants, the Trachycarpus fortunei produces flowers, first inflorescences which can lead to seed production. 

My Trachycarpus has bloomed for several years, starting like this:


 which leads to this:

The palm tree is a male and although it produces pollen, with no blooming female trachycarpus, there'll be no viable seeds produced.  Occasionally a hermaphrodite palm produces pollen and seed, but that is relatively rare.

This old Canary Island Date Palm has lived in successive containers, eventually leading to a garbage can.  Its next home is shown near the patio at Highlands Golf clubhouse.

CIDPs (as they are called) can easily take a 50% root pruning...a good thing, since half the roots are shown in the wheelbarrow.  If it hadn't been planted out, the palm would've declined drastically in health as its roots had "eaten up" all the soil.  And bigger pots (than garbage cans) just aren't available economically.

Rootbound...ya think?  

Oh...and there's a stunning 40-year old Jade Tree that winters in the clubhouse.

The St. Patrick's Day admirer of the Jade Tree was carpenter Hughie.

and the "Dinosaur" plant, Wollemia nobilis, whose parentage goes back millions of years.  The last population was discovered in the Blue Mountains region of Australia:

Wollemia nobilis, rediscovered in 1994

And one of my favourites rounds out the collection, the Bird of Paradise:

Distinctive bloom of Strelitzia, the Bird of Paradise


"Diversion?  More like Plant OCD," grins Kia.





Directors Don't "Manage"


They acquiesce...

Originally submitted to The Morning Star as a letter to the editor, this letter is more appropriate for the blog, and was withdrawn.



Do people really believe that every little community in BC is suddenly filtering water to comply with the Water Act and new Health regulations to limit liability since Walkerton Ontario?  Ask Revelstoke and Kamloops how they got water treatment plants (albeit not filtration) when their residents rejected water referendums.

Whether it’s the rates charged for effluent—or potable—water in the North Okanagan, today’s issues have been building for years because Directors of the water administration of our North Okanagan Communities of Coldstream, Vernon, and Areas B & C through the Regional District do not direct, they acquiesce to bureaucrats.  And for acclaimed Coldstream mayor—and water advisory committee director—Garlick to now state that the water referendum is “educational” is a flagrant insult to all residents who are paying for it.

The problem is that Directors comprise an “Advisory” (vs. Management) Committee.  The first step always in effecting change is to ascertain what went wrong.  Because committee membership is chiefly tied to election terms (3 years; now 4), annexation disputes remove focus and don’t allow members to see beyond their elected term(s).  

Change the name from Advisory to Greater Vernon Management Committee; rewrite their mandate.   Directors need to veto plans, unlike this committee of “advisors” who never veto bureaucrats.

Forget consultants.  We have extremely well-paid professional engineers at GVW whose duties should be to actually design what our “management” committee members have agreed are the “best practices” idea for this area.  They get paid for those skills; not to hire consulting engineers.    

The second step is for Directors to realize that Councillor Kiss has the best practices, to TOTALLY separate water allocations from domestic/potable water.  Unchlorinated unfiltered raw water would be used for outdoor use (golf courses, parks, school playgrounds, turf farms, orchards and vineyards), which complies with the single category allocation they bought and paid for.  Councillor Kiss says the cost of expensive treatment would entirely disappear.

My little 9-hole golf course, Highlands, was built because I had a raw water (non potable) allocation from our 1,100 apple tree operation and no provision existed to sell it back if it wasn’t being used once farming was discontinued.  The golf course is now irrigated with chlorinated water—soon to be “filtered” too—because raw water wasn’t available after Duteau was built.  I was paying 500 per cent more for water, while today using less than 20 per cent of my paid-up allocation.  A 1,000 per cent increase since the orchard was planted.   Meanwhile GVW could re-sell my unused allocation to someone else! 

Only bureaucrats—free from requisite “direction” from directors—could have created that, and working backwards from the revenue they want, comprising myriad categories and six-pages of prices.  

"There could be 40 engineers working on this," offers Kia, "and it would only become a larger fiasco."
 

Friday, October 31, 2014

A Bureaucrat Went to a Seminar


That's usually how it begins.

And presto--registration, hotel, meals and mileage later--a new program pops up.
Roll out the concept.
Give it "weight" by advertising it in the newspaper under the city's redesigned logo and banner.

No matter that it's at odds with something called "appropriate timing".
Or rolled out despite timing.

Consider the City of Vernon's Boulevard Tree Program.
(Bureaucrat:  Ignore the satirical URL: "lifestyles", "sustainability".)

It appears that the City of Vernon has a "tree canopy goal", as referenced in the document.
Who knew?
Sure trees have a canopy; their branches also hang down and extend outwards in all directions.
Some of them have roots that do that too.

I heard of an East Hill "bylaw infraction" just last week:   
The owner was contacted by a Vernon Bylaw officer and given less than a week--before being fined--to prune an elm tree's profusion of stringy branches "overhanging a sidewalk" (but rooted in the owners back yard), and up-prune branches of a maple tree that was "reducing driver visibility".

But when I read the program's additional benefit:  "increase infrastructure longevity", I could almost hear laughter.

The same property owner had plumbing issues a few years ago...slow running drains.  A plumber was hired, then another a year later -- this time with a pipe camera.  The plumber's camera (an unrelated 7-minute video is here) showed a break exactly where the property's drain connected to the city's sewer at the property line.  And, yup, you guessed it!  "You can't fight City Hall" came to mind as this result proves:  The City of Vernon said the problem began on the homeowner's side of the sewer connection!

But the REAL issue with the City's Boulevard Tree Program is timing.

Haven't we sucked in our collective breath on receiving the October quarterly water invoice?
Haven't we heard that golf courses are about to go belly-up because even effluent water rates are spiking?
A recent commenter on a blog story offered:  5 or 6 Middleton Mountain residents told the landscaper they were shocked to see October water bills of between $350 and $500...

So, it's with amusement we read further on the City's boulevard tree program:

"Residents will be responsible for basic ongoing care, including watering and weeding
(and) sign a commitment to provide this care for the tree(s) next to their property"

Watering?
Huh?
In an attempt to prevent additional bylaw officer tours--via his City-provided-and-fuelled vehicle, I'd bet a sunny summer day the East Hill property owner will not ask the City to plant boulevard trees in front of his residence.

Wonder if anyone will notice that another "benefit" of a boulevard tree is that it "improves views".

Graphic of Edmonton's planned boulevard tree program.

"I can still see the Speedo-suited neighbour mowing his lawn," complains Kia, "so much about improving views".


You'll see him forever because branches lower down the trunk aren't allowed...

Maybe he'll move next door to the bureaucrat...

Thursday, October 30, 2014

No End to Unparalleled Gouging on Water Rates


Water continues to go uphill, at least its rates.

Even wastewater (effluent) rates, despite the Mayors of Vernon and Coldstream--who sit on the Greater Vernon Advisory Committee--knowing full well that effluent must be used for irrigation to prevent further discharges to Okanagan Lake.

Effluent should be a win-win situation for golf courses and communities.
Most certainly, effluent irrigation should be extended to orchards and fields. 

But No siree, Bob!

Bureaucrats at Greater Vernon Water have been busy beavers moving decimal points, despite residents' wishes the bureaucrats themselves would simply pack up and go away.

Ready to give bureaucrats a last ride out of town are owners of area golf courses that use effluent, and for good reason.

"Treated wastewaters are an inexpensive water source," states a Saskatchewan publication on page 2 of 6.
Maybe in Saskatchewan.
But not in Bring Cash, especially in the North Okanagan. 

The same bureaucrats at North Okanagan Regional District who are gouging area golf courses are also now dumping effluent sludge--from Metro Vancouver, 325 km distant via diesel haulers--on a future North Okanagan park. 

Here are the damages when per hectare costs soar in 10 years from $224 per hectare to $3,199, which is a staggering  1,328 % increase.

Predator Ridge:  2014 price was $143,352; in 2015 the price is slated to be $234,587.  Up 63.6 %

The Rise, fresh from a court-ordered sale:  2014 was $31,103; in 2015 it'll be $50,400.  Up 62 %

Vernon Golf and Country Club:  2014 was Zero (agreement); in 2015 it's $141,000.  Whammy!


Hillview Golf and Highlands Golf have no access to effluent, and are forced to use potable water at horrendous rates.  Soon that chlorinated water will be filtered too.  (Interesting that this 45-page Okanagan Basin Water Board-commissioned study (Dobson) didn't know Highlands existed at the study's publication in 2010...Highlands Golf has been in the yellow pages of the phone book since 2002).

And since Highlands' third quarter water bill is payable to the District of Coldstream tomorrow, I checked versus the same period in 2013.  Yup...61.9 % increase for Highlands Golf over last year!

Spallumcheen Golf and Country Club pays $15,000 annually because they're lucky enough to be in Spallumcheen, north of us.

The real clincher, though, is what other golf courses, some south of us, pay...big championship golf courses:
Kelowna Golf Club:  $16,000 a year for potable irrigation water.
Gallagher's Canyon Golf Club: $12,000 a year for potable irrigation water.

Effluent-using golf courses south of us:  Penticton Golf and Country Club:  no charge for effluent.
Osoyoos Golf and Country Club pays one dollar a year.

"Those effluent rates give an entirely new meaning to 'are you sitting down?' states Kia. 

Maybe we should all relocate to Saskatchewan.
Shorter golf season AND inexpensive water.

Or ask Al Horning to move here.  He's a champion of the Black Mountain Water District, just 35 km south of us.

Maybe he will visit.
And bring a big stick.


"Hate bureaucracy, and the bureaucrats that practice it."
Jack Welch, former Chairman, GM