Even renters know the impact of what Coldstream and Vernon do to "Developers".
Remember the hue and cry last year when you labelled homeowners as Developers even if they were simply applying for a simple Building Permit for a renovation?
"...grabbing the last pound of flesh from every developer that walks in the door does nothing for improving the affordability of a home..."
Proof is this (partial) Letter to the Editor from I. Murphy, from the Morning Star issue of January 4, 2013, entitled "Rental Rates":
"...grabbing the last pound of flesh from every developer that walks in the door does nothing for improving the affordability of a home in Vernon. A recent example illustrates the point where compulsory city costs in the form of infrastructure improvements, in addition to development cost charges, add almost $30,000 to the cost of a home that would otherwise be able to sell for $220,000.
Taking a leaf from the pages of other municipalities that have reduced or in some cases eliminated DCCs for appropriate developments would greatly assist homeowners and the local economy." I.Murphy.
New Westminster has a DCC Relief Policy, as do numerous other communities in British Columbia.
One government even "does it" to an adjacent government, as proven by the proposed off-site works charges for the planned track and sports field at the College. Coldstream has dictated a charge of $1 million for curb, gutter and sidewalks if the plan proceeds. As though that'll lead to a successful referendum this Spring!
"But Coldstream NEEDS the pound of flesh to pay for their spurious projects," Kia reminds us.
Coldstream and Vernon haven't a clue about improving the lot of renters seeking to buy a home.
Or assisting the local economy.
So renovations went underground...
How's this for a pound flesh from potentially each and every sewer customer in Coldstream... different topic but related all the same.
ReplyDeleteMaybe it was only myself who was naive enough to believe that my water and sewer invoices were billed as indicated. I contacted DoC to find out what dates my water meter was read as it seemed we had pretty high usage for the first 8 days of January when the latest bill arrived. I was advised that the billing dates and the actual usage dates were not in sync and our meter had actually been read Sept 4th and again Dec 6th to comprise this latest bill, despite what is clearly stated on my invoice, "Billing Period: 01/10/12 - 31/12/12". Officially, the software DoC uses is apparently not sophisticated enough to reflect each individual users ACTUAL billing cycle. Right.
No biggie except that when I then requested my meter reading dates from the past year they were as follows, according to the email from DoC; "In your particular case, your water meter was read on December 6/12. Prior to this it was read September 4/12, June 4/12, March 9/12, and December 2/11."
Dec 2/11 - March 9/11 is 98 days, about 9% longer than an average quarter. Again, this would not matter at all except this is the period that DoC uses to calculate the sewer rate for the ENTIRE year! I estimate I was overcharged roughly $70 for the year, which isn't a lot of money, but is (was!) mine. Of greater concern is whether or not everyone in Coldstream was subject to this "stretching" of their billing period as well. 3000 users (give or take) overpaying $70 each per year equals a tidy $210K... not bad for doing nothing.
My query was very quickly escalated to senior management (Thanks Trev!) who promptly dismissed my query as an uninformed rate payer unable to understand basic mathematical principles. After several emails back and forth they simply ignored me and left their stance as follows (email from Seibel):
""""Your query was not dismissed and I certainly apologize if that is the way it came across. As noted previously, there is a defined process for the timing of the meter reads and this process is applied to everyone the same. There was not a miscalculation of the consumption rates for the 1st quarter 2012 billing cycle as it was based on the meter read taken at that time. I understand your concern with the 7 day variance between a “normal” (or equal) quarterly cycle of 91 days and the 98 days for the 2012 1st quarter read. However our meter reading process was followed consistently and all meter reads obtained under the same approach. There is no definitive way to say that the consumption values were equally incurred over the 98 days and as a result there is no way to validate the figures you provided.
There are many factors that impact the meter reading for the 1st quarter including weather, human resources and functioning equipment (meter reading equipment and obtaining a read from the house meter). Based on the fact that the process was applied consistently for all meter reads in the 1st quarter of 2012 I find no basis to provide a rebate to your account.
Thank you,
Trevor Seibel""""
In reading Mr Seibel's response, it is pretty clear that all residents were subjected to this little cash grab and the district has picked up some much needed cash through deceptive practices. So far, it appears the buck really starts and stops with the utility provider and is not regulated or overseen in any fashion.
I guess I will contact the mayor next, we'll see how that goes!
Mr. McDonald's excellent and thoughtful Comment deserves to be a new blog topic...perhaps as early as tomorrow.
ReplyDeleteIn the meantime, I suggest Mr. McDonald contact Councillor Gyula Kiss at Phone: 250-545-8772, rather than the Mayor.
Councillor Kiss will remove his councillor's hat long enough to convince you that he, too, hates sewer rates (and likely knows of DoC's "tactic"). He knows his shit, if you'll pardon the pun.
While the hair on my neck stands up whenever anything even remotely smells of fraud via underhanded practices (which we've seen a lot of here in Coldstream), my gut feeling is that it's not fraud unless they fudge your m3 consumption... and double charge you for any water you've already paid for in the previous period.
Off to look at the invoices for my 3 water meters...
Will send "our" new topic out to everyone in the Coldstream Acreage Owners' Association now that they've likely recovered from the RU10/RU30 acreage rezoning smoke-n-mirrors project by DoC.